What We Do
How we do it
Oct 18, 2021
Grief Ransomware Gang Claims 41 New Victims, Targeting Manufacturers; Municipalities; & Service Companies in U.K. & Europe
Grief Operators Earned an Estimated 8.5 Million British Pounds in Four Months Key Findings: The Grief Ransomware Gang (a rebrand of the DoppelPaymer Ransomware Group) claims to have infected 41 new victims between May 27, 2021—Oct. 1, 2021 with their ransomware.Over half the companies listed on Grief’s underground leak site are based in the U.K. and Europe. The Grief Ransomware Gang appears to…
Read More
View all Advisories →
About Us
eSentire is The Authority in Managed Detection and Response Services, protecting the critical data and applications of 1000+ organizations in 70+ countries from known and unknown cyber threats. Founded in 2001, the company’s mission is to hunt, investigate and stop cyber threats before they become business disrupting events.
Read about how we got here
Leadership Work at eSentire
Oct 12, 2021
eSentire Launches MDR with Microsoft Azure Sentinel Extending Response Capabilities Across Entire Microsoft Security Ecosystem
Waterloo, ON – Oct. 12, 2021 -- eSentire, recognized globally as the Authority in Managed Detection and Response (MDR), today announced the expansion of its award-winning MDR services with Microsoft Azure Sentinel, as part of its integration with the complete Microsoft 365 Defender and Azure Defender product suites supporting Microsoft SIEM, endpoint, identity, email and cloud security services.…
Read More
Our award-winning partner program offers financial rewards, sales and marketing tools and personalized training. Accelerate your business and grow your revenue by offering our world-class Managed Detection and Response (MDR) services.
Learn about our Partner Program
Apply today to partner with the Authority in Managed Detection and Response.
Login to the Partner Portal for resources and content for current partners.
Blog — Oct 15, 2018

SIEM: the many shades of success and failure

It’s no secret that there’s difficulty in implementing, operating and deriving business value from SIEMs. Service providers love to promote FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) with baseless claims insinuating inevitable failure when trying to sign a prospect to a service contract that may not be necessary. Like many things in life it’s not always black or white, there are many shades of grey in between.

During the research phase of our recent service launch of esLOG, I sorted a mountain of statistics on the success and shortcomings of SIEM adopters. One thing became clear: there are factors that lead to varying levels of success and failure from a security point of view. Let’s start with the lay of the land to better understand these factors. According to Ponemon’s SIEM challenges report:

What does this mean? A SIEM is important, but less than half of adopters are essentially deriving value. What’s causing the disparity? Further research painted a clear picture on risk factors that have the greatest correlative effect upon success:

Let’s look at these at a high level to understand their context to the bigger picture.


Digital transformation is pushing visibility requirements well beyond the traditional perimeter. On-premises, cloud, or somewhere in between, most organizations are somewhere on the spectrum of hybrid IT transformation. In a recent study[2], SIEM users ranked greater visibility of network traffic as the second greatest challenge. While the section on visibility could continue for pages, two points emerge that organizations must take into consideration:

  1. Data ingest: more data flowing into the SIEM increases your visibility. However, more data increases storage costs, adds maintenance complexity and requirements on staff (see below), and elevates the need for advanced analytics and correlation (see below). It’s a double-edged sword that must be taken into consideration.
  2. Cloud: cloud data adds complexity that traditional SIEMs weren’t built to handle. In addition as microservices/containers are spun up, the need for visibility and ingestion of unstructured data multiplies complexity and factors to consider.


When it comes to dedicated personnel for SIEM administration and maintenance, according to Ponemon’s Study, 43 percent of organizations have less than one person, 36 percent have one person and only 22 percent have more than one. Interestingly, the third and fourth response in the same study said more staff were needed to optimize the SIEM to understand the data and remove complexity. However, organizations on average report they need 40 percent more security personnel. Unfortunately, when it comes to allocation of SIEM investments, 33 percent of costs are attributed to human capital. For most organizations, understaffing is a contributing factor to the delta of satisfaction. For organizations that are limited by headcount restriction, do not assume existing personnel can take on a challenge of this magnitude. Many enterprise-sized organizations have five or more dedicated personnel to continuous SIEM maintenance. If you are worried, look to augment until you have in-house capabilities.

Advanced analytics

According to Ponemon, the most important feature ranked by SIEM users today is detection of threats through advanced analytics. In addition, the third most important feature is correlation of events into single incidents. While many SIEMs come pre-built with big data analytics, machine learning, UBA, etc., the challenge of parsing data, configuring rules, alerts, etc. remains. Modern SIEM solutions were designed to look for known actions that are indicators of compromise, but they are not effective at detecting the unknown. This is partly because SIEM solutions are adept at handling traditional log data, but not other data types such as network packet, threat intelligence, asset context, and endpoint data, which often provide greater detective visibility when correlated with data from a SIEM. If your organization lacks these capabilities this could be an augmentation area.

Prioritization and response

In another Ponemon Study, enterprise organizations reported on average their SIEMs produced 17,000 alerts on a daily basis, while their IR teams could only investigate four percent of them. That’s 16,320 incidents that were marked as potentially malicious or in violation of policies that were ignored. SOC and IR teams are usually understaffed and overwhelmed. Chasing false positives ends up consuming precious time while trying to find a needle in the haystack. For SIEM users this problem has emerged to be the second and third priority to remedy in the next 12 months as organizations seek to automate manual tasks that consume SOC and IR teams and increase accuracy of security events. This factor can become the biggest contributor in the delta of SIEM satisfaction as detection and alerts on events are one thing, but the ability to quickly investigate and remediate is ultimately the difference between a blip on the radar and a business-disrupting event.

While these four factors are not the only influencers that affect success, they each have major implications in decision making for current and potential SIEM adopters. While many organizations have the resources and capabilities to meet these challenges, evidenced by the 48 percent of respondents who said they are satisfied in the SIEM Optimization Ponemon Study, there remains a delta that must be addressed for the other 52 percent. Otherwise organizations put themselves at additional risk.

For some, this means using managed SIEM providers to augment staffing. For others, it could mean outsourcing to an MSSP for staffing, management and alerting or an MDR provider to augment additional visibility, staffing, management and advanced detection and response. Wherever you are in your journey, look at your capabilities and ask yourself where you sit and the capabilities you need to augment to derive the most value if you were to adopt a SIEM right now. Measuring against these factors will help determine your expectations and roadmap for future success.

[1] Ponemon: Challenges to Achieving SIEM Optimization: March 2017

[2] Ponemon: Challenges to Achieving SIEM Optimization: March 2017

[3] Ponemon: Challenges to Achieving SIEM Optimization: March 2017

[4] Ponemon: Cost of Malware Containment Study

Wes Hutcherson
Wes Hutcherson Director of Product Marketing

As eSentire's Director of Product Marketing, Wes oversees market intelligence, competitive research and go-to-market strategies. His mult-faceted, technology experience spans over a decade with market leaders such as Hewlett-Packard and Dell SecureWorks.