[ad_1]
There’s a legacy connotation connected to SIEM that has led to distributors promoting themselves as some iteration of a next-generation resolution. However is it needed? I’ve been struggling to search out options that may be labeled as “legacy SIEM”—that’s, SIEM with out some type of automation, response, or anomaly detection capabilities or modules.
It is smart for SIEM to deal with all these capabilities. What doesn’t make sense is that this unsynchronized try at differentiating at the moment’s options from these of 2015.
Let’s have a fast take a look at what SIEM options get referred to as at the moment:
- Fusion SIEM
- Subsequent-gen SIEM
- Developed SIEM
- Unified protection SIEM
- Cloud-native SaaS SIEM
- “Not a SIEM” SIEM (aka, unified safety operations platform)
So, is that this an issue? Totally different takes on product names is nothing new, however on this case, it creates a whole lot of confusion out there. First, these names don’t inherently imply something. Positive, some provide indications, like “cloud-native SaaS SIEM platform,” however usually talking, there isn’t a goal distinction between a next-gen SIEM and an advanced SIEM.
Second, there are a number of permutations of modules which can be totally different from vendor to vendor. One would possibly provide SIEM + SOAR + UEBA, whereas one other could provide a SIEM + ASM + XDR. Whereas it’s nice to have extra complete safety merchandise, it’s possible you’ll not want or need the extra modules.
“Not a SIEM” SIEM options add one other layer of confusion, as these merchandise do the whole lot a SIEM resolution does, however they gained’t present up if you Google “greatest SIEM resolution 2024.” One other problem is proving to regulators for compliance functions that though what you employ for SIEM known as a SOC platform, it’s a SIEM resolution.
So sure, I do suppose that including adjectives earlier than the phrase “SIEM” is a futile train that creates extra confusion as an alternative of differentiating a product. However there’s extra.
SIEM and Safety Operations
When evaluating options, it’s vital to resolve whether or not you want a “simply SIEM” or a unified device for automating your safety operations heart. I imagine that we must always hold SIEM as a standalone time period that predominantly focuses on doing what it says on the tin—info and occasion administration.
SIEM itself may be a part of a wider safety operations platform alongside applied sciences reminiscent of XDR, SOAR, UEBA, and ASM. Nonetheless, for a similar causes supplied above, we shouldn’t hold calling these converged options “SIEM.”
For that reason, I’ve adjusted the safety operations reviews I’ve been engaged on, particularly the SIEM Radar and autonomous SOC Radar. SIEM focuses on evaluating instruments’ capabilities with respect to info administration. We’re nonetheless together with extra features reminiscent of automation and evaluation, however they continue to be centered on the primary scope quite than branching out to full UEBA or SOAR capabilities.
Autonomous SOC, then again, is now a extra standalone strategy in comparison with its earlier SIEM + SOAR scope. It evaluates the capabilities required by a safety operations heart to handle and automate its each day actions. There’s much less deal with compliance and extra on response, orchestration, and consumer monitoring.
Subsequent Steps
To be taught extra, check out GigaOm’s SIEM Key Standards and Radar reviews. These reviews present a complete overview of the market, define the factors you’ll wish to think about in a purchase order choice, and consider how a lot of distributors carry out in opposition to these choice standards.
In case you’re not but a GigaOm subscriber, you possibly can entry the analysis utilizing a free trial.
The submit Why isn’t “Simply SIEM” Sufficient? appeared first on Gigaom.
[ad_2]