Connect with us

Security

GigaOm Radar for Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR)

Published

on

Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR) emerged as a product category in the mid-2010s. At that point, SOAR solutions were very much an automation and orchestration engine based on playbooks and integrations. Since then, the platforms have developed beyond the initial core SOAR capabilities to offer more holistic experiences to security analysts, with the aim of developing SOAR as the main workspace for practitioners.

Newer features offered by this holistic experience include case management, collaboration, simulations, threat enrichment, and visual correlations. Additionally, SOAR vendors have gradually implemented artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies to enable their platforms to learn from past events and fine-tune existing processes. This is where evolving threat categorization and autonomous improvement become differentiators in the space. While these two metrics are not critical for a SOAR platform, they may offer advantages in terms of reduced mean time to resolution (MTTR), resilience against employee turnover, and overall flexibility.

We’ve observed a lot of acquisition activity in the SOAR space. This was to be expected considering that, after 2015, a sizable number of pure-play SOAR vendors entered the market. Larger players with a wider security portfolio are acquiring these SOAR-specific vendors in order to enter the automation and orchestration market. We expect to see more SOAR acquisitions as the security tools converge, very likely into next-generation Security Information & Event Management products and services (SIEMs).

SIEM is a great candidate for a central management platform for security activities. It was designed to be a single source of truth, an aggregator of multiple security logs, but has been limited historically in its ability to carry out actions. In the past few years, however, SIEMs have either started developing their own automation and orchestration engines or integrated with third-party SOAR vendors. Through a number of acquisitions and developments, multiple players with wider security portfolios have begun to offer SOAR capabilities natively as part of other security solutions.

Going forward, we expect SOAR solutions to be further integrated into other products. This will include not only SIEM, but also solutions such as Extended Detection and Response (XDR) and IT automation. The number of pure-play SOAR vendors is unlikely to increase, although a handful may remain as fully agnostic solutions that enterprises can leverage in instances when their existing next-generation SIEM platforms do not meet all their use cases. However, for pure-play SOAR vendors to remain competitive, they will need to either expand into other security areas or consistently outperform their integrated counterparts.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Solution Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

The post GigaOm Radar for Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR) appeared first on Gigaom.

Continue Reading

Security

GigaOm Radar for Unified Endpoint Management (UEM)

Published

on

Endpoint management is one of the most significant challenges enterprises face today. The modern workforce is becoming more distributed and demanding the flexibility to work where they want, when they want. Business leaders must respond to this demand and provide access to the services employees require, while also maintaining security and control of the business’s data assets.

To address these issues, organizations need an appropriate endpoint management strategy. The modern approach should be holistic and unified, bringing together control of devices, management of applications, security of data, and user access controls. Failing to deliver an effective endpoint strategy can have significant business impact, negatively affecting efficiency and competitiveness. Now, more than ever, the inability to offer a positive and flexible end user experience can make a business less attractive to potential employees.

The management of endpoint devices is not a new challenge; however, the way we operate has changed. This is reflected clearly in how market-leading vendors have shifted their approach, moving from “point solutions” to developing unified endpoint management (UEM) solutions. UEM solutions provide a single platform to manage a wide variety of endpoints, from desktops and laptops to cloud repositories. They offer granular control policies from configuration and applications to security based on geography, and from complete device restrictions to nuanced data controls.

This GigaOM radar report evaluates the leading UEM vendors that can underpin your endpoint management strategy. We look at tools that effectively meet the demands of the modern enterprise by providing robust management, security, and control. This report aims to give enterprise decision makers an overview of how these offerings can help address the complex challenge of endpoint management.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Solution Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

The post GigaOm Radar for Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) appeared first on Gigaom.

Continue Reading

Security

Key Criteria for Evaluating Deception Technology

Published

on

Attacker techniques and behaviors are constantly improving and evolving. As cyber security defenses zig, attackers zag. This dynamic creates a changed environment—what worked in the past to detect malicious actions most likely won’t work today or in the future. Deception technology (DT) tackles this quandary head on and provides defenders the ability to set traps for attackers and to gather valuable information for making better decisions.

Historically, DT would be executed in the form of either a honeypot or a sandbox. A honeypot is a trap set by defenders to emulate a real device in the network, while a sandbox is a virtual environment meant to deceive malware and allow analysis of the malware post-exploitation without endangering the organization.

Today, DT is described in much broader terms. Legacy DT solutions that attempt to emulate typical on-premises infrastructure like Linux and Windows hosts are ill fitting for modern organizations that have no perimeter or physical data centers. Components like cloud, SDN, remote workers, and the need for forensic analysis of attacker techniques have driven the evolution of DT to include features like mapping to the MITRE ATT&CK or SHIELD frameworks, low-code/no-code customization, and leveraging bait or lures for agentless deception.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Solution Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

The post Key Criteria for Evaluating Deception Technology appeared first on Gigaom.

Continue Reading

Security

Key Criteria for Evaluating Developer Security Tools

Published

on

Software needs to be written, built, and deployed with security in mind. This is true for both the application being created and the activities involved in its creation. In an ideal world, developers would be security engineers also and would build appropriate risk-mitigation features into their software applications, as well as follow appropriate procedures and apply policies to mitigate potential risk. The reality for many organizations, however, is that the urgency for software updates or new software often outweighs the ability to apply appropriate security at every step throughout the development and operation of a software product’s lifecycle.

Expanding the DevOps movement by considering security alongside every development or operational step in an application’s lifecycle, DevSecOps has become as popular a term as DevOps itself. Unfortunately, just as with DevOps, DevSecOps is not a single product or SKU that an organization can procure. There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach. The term itself may be defined differently to take into account the specific needs of an organization or department and touches all people, processes, and tooling across a software development workflow.

One key approach, often the one most associated with the term “DevSecOps,” is the focus on development security tools with a “shift-left” mindset; that is, tools that consider security as early as possible in the software development lifecycle. This mindset involves rapid security education, insights, and direct feedback to developers and engineers early in the development process. We describe this in more detail later.

This Key Criteria report examines the capabilities and trends that decision makers should look for when adopting that shift-left mindset to increase application security and release velocity, while reducing cost and risk.

The report also considers how to evaluate vendors’ capabilities to provide security-related insights, automation, and compliance closer to the developer—earlier in the development workflow—addressing ways to reduce risk while writing code, storing code, and deploying it across process and pipeline. Among our findings:

  • Development security tooling reduces risk and increases developer velocity by applying and enforcing “shift-left” security practices.
  • Developer security tooling automation can close the gap between security engineers and developers without sacrificing development speed.
  • Developer security tooling integrates with existing development and operational tools to increase the visibility of security-related events across development, operations, and security teams.
  • Developer security tooling delivers value by building on software and architecture (cloud and on-prem) vulnerability scanning, application and infrastructure hardening, and other well-established areas of IT security.

Developer security tools and a “shift-left” mindset are key building blocks for helping enterprises reduce the security risks associated with building and deploying applications. In addition to establishing security as a first-class citizen across the development workflow, this approach offers more traditional enterprises with long-established software development practices a connection point to leading-edge best practices, enabling them to develop and deliver software both quickly and in compliance with organizational policies.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Solution Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

The post Key Criteria for Evaluating Developer Security Tools appeared first on Gigaom.

Continue Reading

Trending