Posted Mar 23, 02:35 PM by ben
I attend several security conferences, webinars, and sales briefs a year. I am not an avid fan of SIEM technologies. To be clear: I am fairly unfamiliar with the various vendors, their value adds and differentiators. I know only from the various discussions I’ve had with them at said conferences, webinars, and sales briefs. I typically avoid these conversations, however sales folk are known to be persistent. I put this persistence to my advantage to see how the product may relate to my immediate needs. This is about the point I find the nearest soap box.
The value prop as I understand it: SIEMs let you quickly correlate and respond to an incident. Details be damned on how they achieve correlation; I want to know what happens once an incident is confirmed. Typically such a console event is treated as such; it’s an event. From there you may be able to fire off a Remedy ticket; or count how many events have been reviewed or escalated. Basic work flow stuff that may add a reduction in the amount of monitoring hours. Maybe.
NIST 800-61 states: prepare -> detect -> contain -> eradicate -> recover -> lessons learned. This is pretty basic stuff. SIEMs appear to solely focus on the second step. But their value prop is to allow you to more quickly respond (aka: contain, eradicate, recover) from an incident. This is the disconnect for me. I have more detections than I can shake a stick at and I don’t even own a SIEM. Funneling that through to yet another console that, in theory, gives a higher fidelity on the detection engine just isn’t a value. What would be a value? What is the series of questions I ask every SIEM vendor who corners me?
Zero of these features require outside platforms or partnerships; it’s simply adding more robust features than currently exist. I’ve only had brief conversations on this. Has anyone solved this? Is such an extension of SIEM an appropriate way to handle “response management”? Did I just invent a new term?
Response Management The ability to properly prepare and respond from an incident in a measurable, managed, efficient, and sustained fashion. Routine operations such as drills, escalation, post mortems, lessons learned, and aggregated mitigation summaries should be fed into tactical and strategic plans.
// :: brainstorming/ incident-handling
Commenting is closed for this article.

This work by http://electricfork.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
I lead an information security ops and response team. This site is a collection of interesting notes and brainstorms on the protecting from, detecting of, and responding to badness. You can read more about me or my site here.
You can subscribe to my blog via rss
, or if you're looking for older items check out my archive of previous posts.
I organize a small infosec meetup in baltimore called charmsec. If you are looking for charmsec details you probably want to go here.
RSS
And this is why the day of the S(I,E)M is ending.
Good post!
— Sean Wilkerson · Mar 24, 09:26 AM · #