Microsoft Defender for Cloud Reviews

We primarily use Defender for policies, such as compliance checks and vulnerability management. We have introduced a new system for rolling out policies across the organization, monitoring compliance closely.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud has significantly improved vulnerability management by tracking compliance, networking issues, storage accounts that shouldn't be public, etc. 

The most valuable feature is the regulatory compliance aspect, where we utilize predefined initiatives like NIST. Alert management is another useful feature. Alerts are directly integrated with our email or DevOps board for easy viewing, allowing us to identify problem areas efficiently.

Two or three months ago, they released an update that we liked. Now, you can set up control groups based on policies, giving you a clear overview of where you're lacking. Defender covers almost all our workloads. We don't use a multi-cloud environment, but it covers Azure and AWS well. 

Defender could improve how data is represented. It can be unstructured or slow to load. The recent update allowing policy grouping into control groups is beneficial, but further enhancements for speed and clarity are needed. It would be nice if Defender prioritized vulnerabilities more. It provides an overview of what needs improvement, but I don't know if it's correctly prioritized.

I have used Microsoft Defender for Cloud for about two years.

The stability could be improved, as it can be slow to load at times, but overall it provides the expected recommendations.

It is very scalable, especially in a cloud environment, allowing for extensive resource coverage for vulnerability management.

I have not used customer service for Defender for Cloud, but generally, I am satisfied with Microsoft's support. They are quick to respond and effectively resolve issues.

Positive

I rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud eight out of 10. 

We use Microsoft Defender for Cloud to fill a gap temporarily by providing a platform solution for PaaS scanning, as there wasn't an enterprise-wide product available.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers a good range of workload coverage that effectively meets our current needs.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud enhances security operations by providing a prioritized list of remediation for security issues identified through Azure Policy and Sentinel. This integration offers unprecedented visibility into PaaS resources which we have not been able to do before.

It enhanced our security posture by enabling us to scan PaaS resources.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud has worked well coordinating detection and response across our devices, identities, apps, emails, data, and cloud workloads.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a valuable tool that integrates seamlessly with Azure Policy and our Security SIEM, simplifying implementation and enhancing security posture. Furthermore, its integration with Sentinel provides prioritized remediation steps for security issues identified through both Azure Policy and Sentinel, increasing visibility into PaaS resources and streamlining our security operations.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud could be improved by adding capabilities for NetApp files and more PaaS resources from other vendors, not just Microsoft.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a year and a half.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is scalable.

Microsoft customer support has been great so far.

Positive

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is easily deployed using Azure Policy and a workspace.

So far, Microsoft Defender for Cloud essentially plugs the security gap we were looking to fill, so it has shown a return on investment.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters. It could be cheaper. Wiz is a little better from a reporting perspective.

We did not evaluate other solutions because Microsoft Defender for Cloud was the easiest to implement under the circumstances and the most readily available. Otherwise, the application would have been subject to the standard intake and other corporate processes.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud an eight out of ten.

As a consultant, I implement Microsoft Defender for Cloud for different customers with various use cases. The primary goal is to enhance security for cloud usage in many different ways.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a prioritized list of remediation for security issues. We implemented routines to go through all the recommendations on a weekly basis because there are new recommendations all the time. It has definitely made it easier to stay on top of things.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud has definitely improved the security posture. There is at least a 50% improvement.

The coordinated detection and response across our devices, identities, apps, email, data, and cloud workloads is very good. The implementation of Copilot for security brings it to a whole different level where you can use normal language to ask things.

The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security. It has made the cloud environment more secure, thanks to all the recommendations we can get. They often come with step-by-step instructions, making it easy to implement the suggestions. This greatly increases the security of the cloud environment.

It seems to be very comprehensive in terms of the range of workloads. I have not found anything that is missing. It covers pretty much all the common scenarios.

With the new Copilot functionality available everywhere, it is challenging to pinpoint areas for improvement. If I put in a lot of thought, I might identify things, but right now, nothing significant pops into my mind, but there is always room for more transparency, especially in pricing.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a few years, probably two or three years.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is very stable. I have never experienced any downtime.

The solution seems scalable. You can use most of these cloud platforms as you need. If you need more of it, you can do that. I appreciate the flexibility of the usage.

Being a Microsoft partner company, we have direct lines into Microsoft. Although Microsoft is a large organization, once you work with something for a while, you know where to go. It is a big company, and all big companies might have problems with communication at times.

Positive

I did not use a different solution before Microsoft Defender for Cloud. 

The initial setup is easy. It is straightforward and well-documented. If you need more information, there is always good information on Microsoft's documentation website.

In terms of the implementation strategy, you need to do some research beforehand. Once you have done that, you know what you want to protect and at what level. After you start using it, you get the recommendations, and then you just follow them. It is quite easy.

I am the consultant who manages the initial deployment.

The biggest return on investment is the rapid improvement of security posture. It takes time to find all these small things and recommendations on my own. The system's ability to provide prioritized lists of issues saves a lot of time, allowing me to focus on other tasks.

Understanding the costs of cloud services can be complicated at first. As with a lot of things in the cloud, it can be quite hard to understand the end cost, but it becomes clearer over time. Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something. It is clever marketing, and there is room for improvement there. There should be clarity from the start.

We did not evaluate other solutions before deploying Microsoft Defender for Cloud. We are quite heavily invested in Microsoft's ecosystem.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a nine out of ten. There is always room for improvement, but it is a highly effective solution.

Our primary use case for Microsoft Defender for Cloud is mostly security posture management.

Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture. Defender provides us with a prioritized list of security issues to remedy, which improves our security operations because we know what to tackle first.

The most valuable feature is the comprehensive overview across different workloads. It allows us to see protection not just across one workload, such as virtual machines, containers, infrastructure, or data, but across all our workloads. This overall visibility is really helpful. The recommendations and prioritizations help us understand what to address first.

I use the free CSPM functionality. I don't always use the recommendations because I'm sometimes scared to implement those immediately.

The range of workloads is broad, but we'd love to add more workloads and make it a single security solution that covers all those workloads. Covering more would allow us to see and protect more workloads from a single pane of glass. Additional features should include protection for more AI workloads as it currently focuses primarily on OpenAI.

We have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for two years.

The sustainability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is quite stable, especially with the free tier we're using. It provides a lot of value for being free.

Scalability is still to be determined. We have deployed it across several workloads, but we'll need to see how it performs as we expand to more resources and workloads.

We haven't had to reach out to customer service or technical support yet. Therefore, I can't rate it at this moment.

Positive

I didn't use any different solutions previously. We opted for Microsoft Defender for Cloud due to easy integration with our other Microsoft products.

It was easy to set up as we enabled it across our workloads in Azure.

We handled the deployment ourselves without any integrator, reseller, or consultant.

Being a free tool, it provides visibility and insights into workloads that we wouldn't have had otherwise. This is definitely a good return on investment.

We only use the free tier, so we haven't faced any pricing, setup costs, or licensing challenges.

We didn't evaluate any other solutions as Microsoft Defender for Cloud integrated easily with our existing Microsoft products.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a nine out of 10. It offers free insights and extensive visibility into workloads for a free product, which is great for us.

I used Defender for Cloud in Azure Kubernetes Service and virtual machines to provide more security to these environments.

We are a financial company, so Defender for Cloud helps us create multiple layers to protect assets and ensure a more secure environment. The solution improves our efficiency. We've increased our security posture by around 30 percent. 

Defender for Cloud's most valuable features are the dashboard and alerts about issues inside virtual machines or containers. It covers a wide range of workloads. Defender provides a prioritized list of remediations that helps us improve our team's capacity. Integrating Defender for Cloud with Sentinel has increased our visibility. The solution's coordinated detection and response across devices and identities is impressive because it is complete.

I would like to see more connectors and plugins with other platforms.

I have used Defender for Cloud for three years.

The stability of the solution is good. I don't have a problem with it.

Its ability to scale is good.

I rate Microsoft support eight out of 10. Customer service is good. I deducted two points because the documentation could be clearer. 

Positive

I did not use a previous solution prior to using Defender for Cloud.

The rollout was good. It was easy.

I am a reseller. I am partnering with TD Synnex and TeleScenics.

The return on investment is high, it's about 20 percent.

I did not consider any other solutions.

I would rate Defender for Cloud an eight out of 10. 

We are using the tool for checking for vulnerabilities over my website for my own personal purpose and within my corporate role. This is also a tool that we have deployed. In terms of usage, it's much more related to reporting and vulnerability management rather than setting up from an organizational perspective.

From an efficiency perspective, it has helped with reporting and the self-service availability of security postures.

The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available. Additionally, the suggestions I get from Defender for security levels and recommendations on how to upgrade my security level are very appreciated.

I recommend that they extend the scope for legacy infra assets.

I have been working with it for more than a year now.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

There are no complaints about scalability, and I rate it an eight out of ten.

I rate customer support a nine out of ten. The support team was very responsive to queries.

Positive

Rating the setup, I would give it a six out of ten. The setup process took about two to three days due to waiting on support replies.

I had a support team to help with some of the setup aspects, and they were very responsive.

It's difficult to say because the volume of vulnerabilities and threats has increased, making it tough to compare efficiency between usage before and after implementation.

I don't have visibility into the specific costs, but it seems to be a significant concern for our organization. Every time we consider expanding usage, we carefully evaluate the necessity due to cost concerns.

I am familiar with Dataiku and Databricks, and we use SailPoint in conjunction.

Users must first understand the list of assets they have and whether there is out-of-the-box connectivity with them.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We have deployed Microsoft Defender for Cloud to identify vulnerabilities across various log sources for our client.

We implemented Defender to improve the security posture of our client's landscape.

The single pane of glass that Microsoft offers is highly crucial for several reasons. First, aggregating multiple log sources into a single pane of glass is not achievable without Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Second, we also interact with other cloud environments.

We use Defender's free CSPM functionality for the Microsoft Cloud security benchmark. The benchmark recommendations show all the vulnerabilities that help us to create a remediation plan and to take action.

It is a necessity for us that the free CSPM functionality provides multi-cloud monitoring and posture management because most of our workloads are spread across multi-clouds.

The comprehensive range of workloads protected by Defender for Cloud is sufficient for our needs, as it encompasses all essential security pillars.

We have enabled Defender for Cloud's native support for GCP. A key requirement for us before selecting Defender for Cloud was that it supported other clouds.

Defender for Cloud has aided in reducing the number of vulnerabilities and expediting the resolution process, thanks to its helpful suggestions. Consequently, we have achieved remarkable time savings of approximately 30 to 40 percent each week in comprehending and addressing vulnerabilities.

By integrating Defender for Cloud with the firewall and Defender for Endpoints, we have gained comprehensive security insights through these Microsoft integrations. This unified approach provides a single pane of glass for viewing all security information, eliminating the need to navigate between multiple portals.

Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture.

The unified monitoring has saved us around 30 percent of our time.

Defender for Cloud has increased our security team's efficiency by 30 percent.

Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled.

The multi-cloud capability is an important feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud.

The remediation process could be improved. I have seen that Google has a similar Security Center, where they not only identify vulnerabilities but also provide the steps to fix them. If Microsoft Defender for Cloud could provide remediation steps for all vulnerabilities, it would be a significant enhancement. Currently, only some vulnerabilities have remediation steps available.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for three years.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable. We have not encountered any downtime.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is scalable.

The technical support is good. We can raise tickets without any issues.

Positive

We previously utilized Google's Security Center. However, we transitioned to Microsoft Defender for Cloud following the client's preference for a native solution, as they are a Microsoft-centric organization. Additionally, Microsoft Defender for Cloud's multi-cloud capabilities, including its ability to integrate information from Google Cloud, were compelling factors in our decision.

We have achieved a return on investment in terms of time and efficiency, which translates to monetary savings. For instance, we have gained 30 percent more efficiency in remediation tasks. This means that what previously took ten days can now be completed in seven days, saving us time and, consequently, money.

I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good.

We considered Prisma Cloud before ultimately selecting Microsoft Defender for Cloud. The fact that Defender for Cloud was a native solution for our client significantly simplified the integration process.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud nine out of ten.

We have Microsoft Defender for Cloud deployed across 2,000 locations and over 3,000 endpoints.

No maintenance is required from our end.

The primary use case for Microsoft Defender for Cloud in our organization is investigating breach or security incidents.

Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture by 20 to 30 percent. With everybody moving to hybrid, it's challenging to maintain a good security posture with so many people working from home. I'm impressed with the solution's coordinated detection and responses across devices, identities, apps, emails, data, and cloud workloads. That's why we're considering using Defender in more areas and integrating it more.

I find Microsoft Defender for Cloud's KQL very flexible and powerful. It's really easy to search through with KQL queries to find the security breaches and incidents and to track down the breach itself. Microsoft Defender for Cloud presents a prioritized list of remediation for security issues, giving us a starting point to begin locking things down and tightening security.

I can't think of anything that needs improvement. It's a pretty good product.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for the last year.

Defender's stability has been flawless for us. I haven't noticed any issues.

It's great. It seems perfectly scalable.

I would rate Microsoft customer service and technical support 10 out of 10. They seem quick to respond and get us the answers we need, taking a hands-off approach to helping us integrate.

Positive

I previously used other antivirus products like Kaspersky. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is preferred because it offers cloud ability and is a more trusted partner in the industry.

We used a consultant for the implementation, and the experience was good. No complaints.

Our return on investment is seen through increased productivity. I'm able to get more done with less time.

I evaluated other antivirus products like Kaspersky before switching.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a ten. Having this solution alleviates the need to worry about other antivirus products, offering a one-stop solution.