Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
8 'SOC-as-a-Service' Offerings
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
seven_stones
50%
50%
seven_stones,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/20/2019 | 2:09:36 PM
Re: SOC-as-a-Service is critical for mid-market
"Figure out what their traditional SIEM alerts mean"? The meaning is usually fairly clear from the default alert text. What the vast majority of organisations need is help with first configuring meaningful alerts (not just the defaults) and then how to respond to them - and this is only possible after gaining intimate knowledge of the environment. Is this part of the offering also? I doubt it because that wouldn't be economical - it does actually take time and skilled resource.

SIEM cannot be outsourced aside from the first level response of a SOC capability - and then only after the aforementioned use cases are configured and the capability is tuned - 18 months at least.

These services do little more than add to the problem.
AaronB633
50%
50%
AaronB633,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/15/2019 | 5:30:14 PM
SOC-as-a-Service is critical for mid-market
Glad to see SOC-as-a-Service highlighted as a practical solution for the masses that don't have the wherewithal to staff, resource, and retain an in-house SOC. It's also interesting to see the debate over the definition of this as a defined market. As a side effect of a fast-paced growing market, the phraseology of what's what is very nuanced. What's the difference between an MSSP, a co-managed SIEM, or a SOC-as-a-Service? Depends on who you ask. It would be interesting for sure to see a detailed and agreed-upon definition for each.

Vendors, such as ourselves, can easily see ourselves fitting all three of those categories. At Netsurion, we deliver what we call a co-managed SIEM. I would say that it easily aligns with the concept of a SOC-as-a-Service as well. It includes a fractional SOC team (EventTracker SOC) to fit the needs of the organization, that operates a SIEM platform (EventTracker SIEM) complete with managed security services like vulnerability assessment service, managed EDR (EventTracker EDR), and even managed threat deception service (EventTracker Honeynet) to name a few.

I think regardless of where you land on MSSP, co-managed SIEM, and SOC-as-a-Service markets, most would agree that more technology alone is not going to cut it for 90% of organizations with a security team of 1... or none. All of these solutions address the need for cybersecurity convergence, but are different in what degree do they provide product, people, and process to solve the problem. What layers of defense are within scope? How is it deployed and maintained? How are responsibilities aligned between vendor and customer? 


US Turning Up the Heat on North Korea's Cyber Threat Operations
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  9/16/2019
Preventing PTSD and Burnout for Cybersecurity Professionals
Craig Hinkley, CEO, WhiteHat Security,  9/16/2019
NetCAT Vulnerability Is Out of the Bag
Dark Reading Staff 9/12/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-3738
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-18
RSA BSAFE Crypto-J versions prior to 6.2.5 are vulnerable to an Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature vulnerability. A malicious remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability to coerce two parties into computing the same predictable shared key.
CVE-2019-3739
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-18
RSA BSAFE Crypto-J versions prior to 6.2.5 are vulnerable to Information Exposure Through Timing Discrepancy vulnerabilities during ECDSA key generation. A malicious remote attacker could potentially exploit those vulnerabilities to recover ECDSA keys.
CVE-2019-3740
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-18
RSA BSAFE Crypto-J versions prior to 6.2.5 are vulnerable to an Information Exposure Through Timing Discrepancy vulnerabilities during DSA key generation. A malicious remote attacker could potentially exploit those vulnerabilities to recover DSA keys.
CVE-2019-3756
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-18
RSA Archer, versions prior to 6.6 P3 (6.6.0.3), contain an information disclosure vulnerability. Information relating to the backend database gets disclosed to low-privileged RSA Archer users' UI under certain error conditions.
CVE-2019-3758
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-18
RSA Archer, versions prior to 6.6 P2 (6.6.0.2), contain an improper authentication vulnerability. The vulnerability allows sysadmins to create user accounts with insufficient credentials. Unauthenticated attackers could gain unauthorized access to the system using those accounts.