SOAR stands for Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response. SOAR technologies is a solution stack of compatible software programs that allow an organization to collect data about security threats from multiple sources and respond to low level security events without human assistance. Since the security industry began to adopt automation and orchestration concepts into security programs, there have been some common misconceptions that have plagued the technology. Let’s take a look at these disadvantages below.
Automation Will Remove the Need for Security Professionals
Since the beginning of automation, this innovation has been seen by some as a positive change for the future, though others see it as the stopping point for mankind. These opposing viewpoints stretch across every industry and are not unique to information technology or cyber security sectors. There is no denying that automation has and will change the manner in which we carry out our responsibilities, yet that doesn’t imply that it must be a negative move.
Currently, security analysts are bogged down with a seemingly never-ending stream of security alerts. Every last one of these alarms must be looked into and triaged to guarantee that a potential danger doesn’t sidestep an association’s resistances. However, despite their best attempts, security professionals continue to struggle to stay ahead of these threats which overwhelm their security operations centers. This is one area where automation can help.
Rather than removing employment from the hands of experts, automation can be used to supplement the mundane repetitive actions analysts must take when reviewing and triaging alerts. These assignments, which are important to decide a ready’s legitimacy, can be naturally executed without the need to include an expert. This will permit the expert to focus on more significant level undertakings which require real human association, and thus, will diminish the alert fatigue phenomena that keeps on plague present day SecOps groups.
Security Automation and Orchestration Are Too Complex to Deploy
Another common misbelief around security automation and orchestration is that it is excessively mind boggling to effectively execute into a security program. Likewise with any new innovation, there will consistently be an underlying delay towards selection and a forthright speculation that an association must get ready for. The equivalent goes for security automation and orchestration.
A lot of what the industry is seeing now is the gradual adoption of these technologies into choice areas of an organization’s security program. However, if the adoption of this technology or any technology is not methodically planned, the outcome is usually less desirable. To prevent running into this automation roadblock, organizations need to explore its deployment in small, manageable pieces.
Survey areas in which automation and orchestration technologies would be best suited. Make an arrangement for sending and distinguish benchmarks which will decide the implementation’s prosperity. Assess each turn out as they are executed and change any desires or final products as each arrangement is executed. The best way to guarantee a successful implementation is to separate the master plan into reasonable pieces and guarantee that the group has a practical vision and plan on the most proficient method to arrive. An inability to design implies an inability to succeed.
Full Automation Is Dangerous
As with our previously mentioned Security Orchestration, Automation and Response SOAR disadvantages, the belief that full automation is dangerous is caused by an attempt to automate everything, and to automate everything without a plan. When setting up full automation you must have a thoroughly evaluated workflow developed that the automation plan will follow. Without this completely developed workflow, an organization runs a high chance of either blinding themselves to ongoing activity, or burying themselves in a mountain of false positive alerts that their team will never recover from.
So as to forestall this basic error, meet your experts to comprehend the work processes that they follow for normal occasions. When you have a superior comprehension of how these occasions are taken care of, the anticipated and repeatable procedures will become featured. Automate these areas first. Evaluate their outcomes on a consistent basis until you are sure that all conditions have been documented and handled correctly. When comfortable, automated actions such as taking containment steps on behalf of an analyst may be incorporated. Only incorporate these types of actions when the team is confident in the developed workflow and its success.
Feel free to contact E-SPIN for your specific operation or project requirement, from SIEM to SOAR or Unified Security Operation Center (SOC), SecOps or modernize your operation center with a hybrid of NetOps NOC with SeOps SOC to become modern DigitalOps.