Splunk Enterprise Security Reviews

We use Splunk for log analytics, blocking dangerous files, etc. It helps to shape our security policies. Splunk is managed by our service provider, but we regularly get security insights from them.

I like the search feature and the indexing. It's very fast and comprehensive. It's easily tuned by your service provider, so I can quickly find the results I'm seeking. So it's very practical. We are working with the search feature and using multiple indexes that combine devices from different environments, so it's easy to collect information across environments. 

We can relatively quickly detect some malicious activities based on attack patterns and implement use cases configured by our service provider with help from Splunk. It improves the speed of threat mitigation because you can gather information about the attack patterns from a few days of online activity to block threats and take the necessary actions. 

We implemented Splunk at the end of 2020, so it's been around three years. 

Splunk Enterprise Security is scalable.

We have not been in direct contact with Splunk except for a workshop where I met a few of them. My impression was that they were skilled, experienced experts. They seemed helpful, so I had a good impression.

The service provider deployed Splunk, so I wasn't involved. I had heard that they experienced some difficulties setting it up, but I don't think it was harder to install than other solutions.

Splunk is very expensive. The license is based on the volume of the logs ingested. I was responsible for managing the contract with our service integrator. I don't know the precise details of the competing solution, but I have heard that Splunk is more expensive than others. I don't know what the going rate is on the market, but I think there are at least two competitors that are less expensive. We have experienced a few issues with our service providers in terms of log filtering and ingestion, so we continue to pay a bit more per day for our logs.

I rate Splunk Enterprise Security eight out of 10. 

We use the solution for tracking successful and unsuccessful logins. We track privileged account activities and also a variety of other things, like developing use cases for data exfiltration or integration with ETRs and other security tools for data analysis. 

We wanted to solve the issue of unauthorized access, brute force attacks, and exfiltration. It's helped with MITRE ATT&CK frameworks. 

The organization has been able to quickly triage issues and investigate if something is a true threat or not. Most times, it helps our security posture. The level of confidence we have is high. With Splunk, you can query accounts when you see some strange activity. 

It gives me notifications of notable events. 

The default dashboard is very good. We can see our security posture from there.

On-prem and cloud data analysis are good. You can aggregate it if you need to in order to get good data.

Splunk has proven to be great when tracking down anomalous behavior. The logs are excellent. It is the platform in the industry.  You can integrate anything. The amount of information and usability you get out of Splunk is very good.

We do use the Threat Intelligence Manager. It can be integrated with third parties. The actionable intelligence we get is useful. There is sequencing where you can gauge some actionable steps. 

I use the MITRE ATT&CK framework when I am developing a new use case. It helps us discover the overall scope of an incident. Using Splunk is essential in developing that. 

It's good for analyzing malicious activities and detecting breaches. I'd rate it highly in its capabilities. However, if you don't have the knowledge, it may be difficult. You might get a lot of false positives.

It's helped us detect threats very fast, in almost real time. 

We have reduced our alert volume. I'm not sure of the exact number, however, instead of having 100 to 200 false positives, we might get 20 to 30. 

It has helped us speed up our security investigation, although I don't handle it directly. I simply do triage, and it definitely helps there. 

There are a lot of false positives which can cause a lot of fatigue. 

Sometimes, there is latency in the logs. 

When you deploy Splunk, you need a high level of knowledge. You really need to know what you are doing. It requires a lot of things.

They need to come up with straight steps to get things done, to have a step-by-step process to achieve this or that. 

I've been using the solution since 2020.

The stability is okay.

Splunk would tell you, especially on the different licenses they have, your storage, and your level of ingesting, it can vary. 

Splunk needs to be more clear between storage and performance. 

We worked with a client where almost immediately their storage was already in red. They didn't understand their storage needs as that wasn't clear. 

The solution cuts across countries. I'm not sure how many end-users we have.

The scalability is okay. It scales well even though you have to consider your licensing and storage.

Technical support is good. 

Positive

I have used ELK previously. 

I have been involved in the deployment of Splunk in the past.

The initial setup is not so straightforward for those new to it. I'm accredited and have four years of implementation. You really need that level of knowledge. It's straightforward to make a feed, make it compliant, and do field mapping, however, there are many things you need to do before deployment. 

We had six to eight people deploying Splunk. They were all mostly Splunk professionals, who understood the product and devised a plan and timeline for implementation. We integrated the relevant stakeholders into the process. We were connecting to the Splunk Cloud. 

There is a little bit of maintenance required to maintain the infrastructure. 

We used all in-house resources to implement Splunk.

I have witnessed an ROI while using Splunk. There were some incidents previously in which the company lost millions of dollars. Bringing in Splunk has curbed that. 

The pricing is on the high side. It's not a solution for SMEs.

I'm not sure if any other options were evaluated by the company. 

Currently, we are just Splunk customers. 

We do not monitor various clouds; we only monitor one. However, they have a good solution in that we don't need to worry about maintenance if we do. 

We've never used the Mission Control feature.

If someone is looking for the cheapest SIEM solution, there are a lot of open-source options out there. However, Splunk definitely is an option. If a company is bigger, it would benefit from Splunk. They will be paying some money for it, however, it's worth it.

Resilience is important. To some extent, Splunk addresses this as we haven't had any issues. It's important to have resiliency. If your solution is not resilient, you risk security issues. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I would advise others to spell out what you really need and make it measurable so that you will understand if Splunk is right for you. If you are going to use Splunk, it's important to do your due diligence. 

We use Splunk Enterprise Security for our security monitoring and incident management. This is our global application that we are using for security monitoring and compliance.

We've seen some good improvements from a business perspective, particularly regarding security monitoring. However, when I consider our current challenges and future roadmap, I don't believe Splunk Enterprise Security has the capabilities we need. We previously faced challenges with QRadar, which prompted us to migrate to Splunk Enterprise Security. While Splunk Enterprise Security has addressed the past issues we encountered, it fails to meet our future requirements. Currently, it effectively addresses existing threats, but it doesn’t tackle advanced threats, which is a significant challenge we foresee with Splunk. There is still a lot of room for improvement.

With the Classic flavor we have in our company, the feature that I find good in Splunk Enterprise Security is from the MITRE coverage point of view, and then the level of information that it provides. The integration with its own SOAR platform is also one of the pros.

From the product point of view and deployment point of view, Splunk Enterprise Security is satisfactory. It is not simple; it is at a medium level when it comes to deployment and management of the tool altogether. This includes not only the enterprise platform but also other components such as deployment servers or the Splunk agents we use for collecting logs. When comparing it with different vendors in the industry, from the deployment and maintenance point of view, it is not up to the level of other vendors. 

When discussing the drawbacks, it's important to note that the flavor I’m currently using is called "Classic." Unfortunately, this platform does not offer any of the new features that Splunk introduces. As a result, we are the last ones to find out about new capabilities, and we’re also slow to implement them. Splunk tends to release new features with different flavors of their platform, and being on the Classic flavor means we are least likely to receive the latest updates. This is a significant concern I have regarding Splunk.

When comparing Splunk Enterprise Security with next-gen SIEMs, we look for AI and ML models being incorporated in such a way that it automatically should be able to detect behavioral-based detections. It should be able to detect behaviors from logs and show us the entire attack surface and blast radius of any particular incident, which is primarily missing.

The capability of AI, Artificial Intelligence, is missing, which would help to automatically detect and read data comprehensively. Splunk lacks the new native solutions for agent deployment, which is essential for a large enterprise.

Currently, there is Machine Learning in Splunk Enterprise Security, but that is resource exhaustive and complex, bringing an impact onto our overall stack performance. Technical expertise in Machine Learning is required, and continuous monitoring is needed to ensure Machine Learning learns about our data to provide results, which is resource exhaustive, time-consuming, and costly.

Artificial Intelligence is missing in the Splunk Enterprise Security platform, which would help us read the data automatically, learn from it, and provide attack surface area from a 360-degree perspective. The fixed pricing model requires upfront purchase based on assumptions and roadmap, requiring payment for the next two to three years regardless of usage.

I have been using Splunk Enterprise Security for around three years.

On a stability scale, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Regarding scalability, I would rate it a seven out of ten. I don't have the pay as you go model. 

We have 150 users using this solution.

Whenever we raise any support case in Splunk, even after providing the required information, if a person is working on it and it gets transferred or handed over to a different representative in a different shift, they keep asking the same questions and requesting more details. Even when we ask for a call, even for P1 or P2 incidents, they keep going around asking for details. When we request P1 or P2 support, it would be wise to get into a call, get all the details, and have a troubleshooting call to address the issue on a priority basis. The technical support representatives keep transferring the tickets during shift handover, and different representatives ask the same questions multiple times, wasting our precious time. The issue doesn't get resolved until I escalate it to their higher management.

Positive

We were using QRadar previously. We had legacy systems, and from the volume and log source point of view, from the costing perspective and detection point of view, we thought Splunk Enterprise Security was far better than QRadar. Splunk Enterprise Security would provide better capabilities and out-of-box detections. These were some of the things that we saw, and Splunk Enterprise Security was also one of the leaders in SIEM technology. However, once we started using Splunk Enterprise Security, we discovered it was not the right tool.

The initial setup was of medium complexity. It took approximately 8 to 12 months to migrate from QRadar to Splunk Enterprise Security. 

The cloud platform we are using is maintained by the Splunk team itself. However, when it comes to our on-premises deployment, the maintenance is very high, cumbersome, and costly from both resource and time perspectives.

We haven't saved any money with Splunk Enterprise Security. Instead, we have spent excess of the budget on this with unexpected costs. That's one of the pain points I see with Splunk Enterprise Security. There haven't been any savings.

Splunk Enterprise Security comes with high fixed costs. That's one of the disadvantages. When comparing with different vendors, they offer pay-as-you-use models, which is more user-friendly, but Splunk Enterprise Security comes with fixed pricing.

We use different security tools as well.

For any user who wants to have a cost-efficient and next-gen SIEM solution, I wouldn't recommend Splunk Enterprise Security. However, if a user is not concerned about cost and is looking for an on-premises solution, then I would suggest Splunk Enterprise Security. For anyone who wants to go for a cloud and cost-effective solution with next-gen capability, I wouldn't recommend this.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

For incident detection, this is the main purpose for which I can use the product. That is the only use case for my team. It may be different for my team who is actually processing the incidents and a bit different for me, as I am a manager. For me, the most important aspect is making statistics over a period, seeing who did what, and extracting all the needed information. It is quite easy and intuitive.

Incident detection is the positive impact I have seen from Splunk Enterprise Security. It probably saved the company from financial losses because of the early detection of the incidents. I cannot say about ROI because I am not involved in financial matters, so I cannot estimate any kind of cost.

There are so many products and features that it may be quite hard sometimes to find something that you are looking for. Search capabilities or maybe some kind of AI assistant helping to find what you want would be beneficial improvements.

I have been dealing with the product for about seven years.

From time to time, there are some glitches with stability. Some logs are missing, and we have an external SOC team handling this license for us. Whenever there is something wrong with Splunk Enterprise Security, they need to raise a ticket, and it can be time-consuming to wait for them to reply; this is also a disadvantage.

It is easy to scale up or down if you have the money. The solution is quite pricey not only because of the license but also when scaling it and maintaining it.

I have not raised any ticket myself, but I have heard some not very good stories about technical support from Splunk Enterprise Security. Support did not provide quick enough help.

Positive

I have not been using any other competitors.

I have no idea about installation because I took no part in it.

We have a dedicated team that is doing all the configuration of Splunk Enterprise Security for us. We are just managing what has been prepared for us.

It saved the company from financial losses because of the early detection of the incidents. I cannot say about ROI because I am not involved in financial matters, so I cannot estimate any kind of cost.

I heard the solution is quite pricey.

I have not been using any other competitors.

Users should know what they are looking for. Splunk Enterprise Security is probably customizable enough that they could achieve their goals, but they need to know what they want to get from it. On a scale of 1-10, I would rate Splunk Enterprise Security an eight overall.

There are tons of use cases for Splunk, but our main one is insider threat.

It's easy to deploy Splunk, and mostly, we don't have to reach out to the customer after it's done. It's a simple tutorial with a couple of pages, and they can configure it themselves. The simplicity of deployment has been the greatest asset

Splunk has improved our customer's ability to ingest enterprise data. We don't have to have hands-on every customer's environment. We can farm that out to the local SAs. They find the install, and it's a simple firewall update. We're getting data.  

It provides an all-in-one resource. Before, we had one product for firewalls and one for our gateways. Pairing up with Cisco helped because a lot of our information is based on our network, firewall, or router. Having Splunk intertwined with them will ensure that it's one resource and one solution.

'The solution has helped to fine-tune false positives. Sometimes, out-of-the-box solutions aren't customizable, but Splunk is. It can clone, alter, and make it your own.

Before Splunk, we didn't have a tiered solution where there was some low-hanging fruit that was easily handled by the tier ones and higher-end stuff. It went from level two to level three bordering on level four CCNA. That's what I was looking for, a maturity model. We've developed into a progression from tier one to tier two, etc. At the high end, we have forensics for long-term solutions or advanced persistent threats.

A lot of things can be handled at the tier one level, and there are 12 to 24 hours before it floats to tier two. Resources are underutilized, and not everyone's working. You're not handing a tier-one ticket to a tier-four guy who's just like, "Dude, it's this." The tier-one guy is getting a tier-four ticket. It streamlines the resolution process.

I like the ease of setting up dashboards on Splunk. They're easy to create, manage, alter, and share. You can fine-tune them any way you see fit. One of Splunk's unique features is that you can customize it for your needs, especially if you've got homegrown solutions. It accepts whatever kind of logs and can be normalized at any point. With a one-off solution, you can work with the developer who created it, and they give you the features or key information you want to keep.

Many people are talking about deploying upgrades from the deployment server. It's necessary, particularly from the perspective of insider threat. You can see if something's breached. If you notice an anomaly at 2 a.m., we've got your rules firing, letting you know immediately. It's near real-time notification of any issues.

We have used Splunk for two years.

Splunk's stability is inherent to its scalability. It's malleable and adjustable. It's like pottery that you make to fit your needs.

It's easy to divert resources where they're needed. Often, we have several projects that have reached the end of their life, and we shift the resources. The fact that you can set up a new index or set of indexes and push some feeds into specific structured indexes makes it a lot easier instead of having everything in one giant database and trying to find what you're looking for.

With the streamlining, it's a lot easier for the end customers. They've noticed a quicker turnaround for low-level stuff, and the high-level requests get directed to the right people. We used to have a turnaround window of about a month. Now it's down to a week for most tickets. In the past, they sometimes put a ticket in, and it might be a week before someone even looks at it. Now, we have a system in place where they get a response within 24 hours.

We were using ArcSight but switched because our customer said they wanted to go to Splunk. ArcSight didn't have the reach, and the complexity of deploying it inhibited a lot of customers from using it.

Deploying Splunk was easy. We worked on developing the in-house solutions and passed them off to the customers, providing a network location to download what they needed and the instruction guides. After that, it was simple to unzip and configure the inputs and outputs. We were up and running.

We've probably tripled the amount of insight into our infrastructure and environment.

They looked at Elasticsearch and the ELK Stack—trying to do things with Kubernetes and Kafka. That can be used with Splunk. In terms of cost, complexity, and ease of deployment, Splunk is often on top. It gets the data out there as quickly as possible. The fact that Splunk is as vast as it is means it isn't hard to find a resource that's touched it and can use it.

I rate Splunk Enterprise Security eight out of 10. It's missing some features that other solutions have, such as the ability to upgrade the endpoint and perform endpoint universal forwarders from a deployment server instead of using a third-party solution, such as Puppet or Ansible.

We use the solution to find systems acting strange or having strange services and security attacks.

Splunk Enterprise Security helps us sift through tons of data to find relevant information we're looking for as far as activity goes.

The solution's most valuable feature is the aggregation of all the logs in one place, using enterprise securities built-in or ESCU use cases to find them.

The end-to-end visibility Splunk Enterprise Security provides in our environment is very important because we might not see everything or miss something without it.

Once you have it set up correctly, Splunk Enterprise Security works great for helping us find any security event across multi-cloud, on-premises, or hybrid environments.

Splunk Enterprise Security has helped improve our organization’s ability to ingest and normalize data. The ability to identify and solve problems in real-time is pretty robust.

Splunk Enterprise Security has helped reduce our alert volume with RBA and has helped reduce our mean time to resolve. With correlation searches in risk-based alerting, you don't have to sift through information; it is presented to you.

The solution's case management system could be further improved to make it easier for analysts to manage cases. The only limiting factor is the amount of data you're sifting through and the overall size of the number of correlations you're looking for.

I have been using Splunk Enterprise Security for seven to eight years.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support is awesome, and I love it.

Positive

I've deployed the solution a few times. The deployment is very labor-intensive and takes a lot of work.

Splunk Enterprise Security is an expensive solution.

I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Our SOC is using Splunk Enterprise Security as a SIEM. There are multiple use cases because it is the main tool for SOC analysts. We have plenty of use cases. It is being used for IT security monitoring. We also have some custom use cases for securing applications, and then we have some of our internal customers developing their own use cases, but the main purpose is for the SOC. 

We also have additional work that is much more tricky. It is related to using AI to detect insider threats.

We are incredibly increasing our coverage as per the NIST framework that we are using for our operations. We are always extending. That really took off after implementing Splunk. It was a big moment. I have been there from the very beginning when we started implementing Splunk. Like everything new, there was a little bit of difficulty, but after we implemented it, there was an incredible increase in our SOC efficiency.

Splunk Enterprise Security helped reduce our mean time to resolve based on my knowledge, but I do not know how much because I left the department one year ago. On the security monitoring side, we have very good MTTR globally due to Splunk and the processes that we have implemented. We have other kinds of tools. Compared to the other tools that we have, our MTTR is far better with Splunk. Compared to last year, it was reduced by half. It was already good, but it got reduced a lot again.

It is lovely to have everything we need in one tool. Everything is quite centralized.

AI is everywhere, and I feel we need to discover AI for cybersecurity. For the last five years, I myself have been setting up a product and evaluating AI, but I did not do it directly in Splunk because there was some fear about the performance on the platform. That is why we chose to build our own platform based on S3 and AWS to execute and run all the algorithms and send the data back into Splunk. We now have a good base with innovation. We have a better base to directly include machine learning use cases in Enterprise Security, but they need to provide more capability and autonomy to the customers because there is so much to do. When you are lucky enough to have a team of data scientists, they want to have free hands, so a balance has to be found between giving a lot of autonomy and putting enough control so that they do not do something stupid on the platform, which can impact the performance of the standard use cases as well. There is a compromise there. However, AI is growing so fast that you absolutely need to give autonomy to the team to manage and utilize AI. This means providing easy access to a new library to build machine learning. They need to give us some flexibility, and it seems that with the new toolkit, it would be okay. Data scientists love to have freedom.

Splunk Enterprise Security provides us with the relevant context to help guide our investigations, but it would be interesting to add even more context, for instance, in order to raise the level of risk. That is something that can be implemented. For instance, when it comes to data loss prevention, it is known that somebody who is about to leave the company is much more likely to take data. If you have this information soon enough, because the person will tell HR in advance, you can increase the level of risk for data loss for that user, but you do not always get to know that in advance. In such cases, some indicators in the behavior of the users who are leaving could be connected to AI. For instance, if you are using natural language programming, you can grab emails with words like farewell. There are plenty of keywords that you can catch that would give you an indication that the person is about to live. When you have internal and external partners, they can leave at any time. You do not always get the information in advance, but there are always farewell parties or goodbye emails. You can use this kind of information to raise their risk on the specific alert. It is efficient in the sense that you decrease your false positive rate. To me, AI is something that can help them accelerate and improve on what they are already doing.

Splunk Enterprise Security is very costly. Pricing is probably its weakest spot.

I have been using Splunk Enterprise Security for five years.

It is difficult for me to answer this because I am no longer in charge now, but it has been stable from my point of view. 

Its scalability is good provided you have the right license agreements.

It depends on the situation. The problem at our end that is causing an issue with Splunk support is that we have a customized environment. All the problems that we submit are specific, and they can be a bit difficult to solve. Sometimes, their support is efficient, and at other times, we have to wait a bit too much. I would rate their support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I arrived at the time of transition. We were probably using RSA. We switched to Splunk Enterprise Security because we needed to jump to another scale. At that time, there was a complete change in the organization. We went from the old-school cyber to Cyber 2.0. We had a lot more visionary managers who came from other companies where they were using Splunk. We had good guidance.

It was a bit difficult. The team that was developing the use cases did not have access to the real data because it was not ready yet. Developing a SOC use case without the data is something difficult. That is why it was difficult at the start, but it was not because of the tool. It was more of a matter of project management. After we moved on from the difficult stage, we were able to set up this use case factory where some of the users were themselves in a bit of self-service mode. This was a very good opportunity to enlarge our capability to cover all the applications in the best way.

For Splunk, we use AWS. We have a private cloud. We have difficulty using cloud-managed services.

Pricing is probably its weakest spot. As compared to some competitors, Splunk is really expensive. The problem is that Splunk is like Rolls-Royce. It, for sure, is the best one. Gartner says it, and the customers say it, but sometimes, you do not need a Rolls-Royce to get to the supermarket.

The problem is that the licenses that we have are based on the volume of data that we ingest in a day. The data that we ingest is only growing. We have initiatives right now for better management of data. It makes sense in terms of storage and sustainability. The pricing model, especially for Europe, is difficult. I am just out of the negotiation for the renewal of the license. We bought it for three more years. This is good news for Splunk and us as well, but it was difficult to discuss with the sales and explain that we do not want to increase the cost because it is already too high, and if it could decrease, it would make sense. It is very difficult to have this understanding from the salesperson. It was difficult for my Splunk account partner, but we succeeded in the negotiation. It was a win-win situation.

They need to be fair and adjust the price as per the usage. If the price goes too high, we would just have a no-go from the top level of the company, which would be a pity. It can happen. It has happened in the past. At some point, we had a big contract with Microsoft for Office, and we are now with Google. It was a shock for the partners and people inside the company, but we did it. We now have Google and we are happy with it. We still have a bit of Microsoft. It is important to keep the balance.

We are looking at the data usage with Splunk's team. We are looking at whether the data onboarded and dashboards that were developed are really being used to avoid wastage. If any data is not necessary in Splunk, we just stop onboarding it. We have other data to onboard anyway. My idea is to be much more efficient in the way we are managing the data and not to go the way we did it in the past.

I did not evaluate other solutions but the company surely did.

Splunk's unified platform has not helped consolidate networking, security, and IT observability tools, but it is not due to the tool. It is due to our company's structure. I have been part of the two teams. Previously, I was a part of the cybersecurity team, so I was mainly using Splunk Enterprise Security. Now I am leading the monitoring team, so I am much more on the SOC side of it. My team provides service to the cybersecurity team that is using Splunk Enterprise Security. In the end, we would like to have one solution, which would be Splunk. I would like to have IT monitoring and observability with ITSI in the future. This centralization would bring efficiency. One log being used for cybersecurity purposes can also be used for other purposes. Everything centralized would give us the most efficient way to access the data and limit duplication. It would be helpful for efficiency, cost control, and data governance.

It is absolutely crucial for us to have end-to-end visibility. For our cybersecurity needs, we should be able to reach anything. We even have this concept of Watch the Watcher, so visibility is absolutely key. We have the opportunity to audit the activities of even cyber analysts, so visibility at every stage is absolutely key. For example, all the SIEMs could be under attack, which would be a nightmare. Imagine it being an insider threat where the attacker knows what exactly we are monitoring. With AI, these kinds of risks are even higher. That is why we are all in for AI for Cyber and Cyber for AI. We need absolute visibility, but we also need protection.

Splunk Enterprise Security has not helped us reduce our alert volume. We are not at that level of maturity at this point. It is still growing.

I would rate Splunk Enterprise Security a nine out of ten. It is a good product. It needs some progress with AI, but based on what I have seen in the presentation for version 8, it seems promising.

We use Splunk Enterprise Security for our security analysts for them to be able to view incidents. They are not 100% dependent on Splunk Enterprise Security as their incident source. They do have other tools that they use and other things like whois data, threat intel, and lookups for our domain. They are able to quickly look at the activities done for the assets that we have.

I am not from the management or the leadership, but I do feel that it has been helpful for us Splunk engineers who are responsible for looking at all the data and logs. Splunk Enterprise Security quickly gives us a view of an endpoint or a user or identity. If I want to look for an identity or an asset, I just quickly go into Splunk Enterprise Security. I know where to go and get a quick analysis for a respective object. The analysts have their dashboards, and they have their action items. They use it differently. They follow all the common procedures.

We are on-prem. We are not on the cloud. As of now, Splunk Enterprise Security does not provide us with end-to-end visibility, which is one of the drawbacks of why we need to use other tools. It is not that Splunk Enterprise Security cannot do it. It is just the way it is configured right now. We are working with Splunk engineers. We have a lot of professional service hours that we spend with them bringing all parties into the picture and doing working sessions.

Right now, Splunk Enterprise Security is in the middle in terms of helping us find any security event across our environment. Based on the way the configuration is done in our environment, it would not be right to say that the incident would be reported accurately from Splunk Enterprise Security. That is because not a lot of data is being put into Splunk Enterprise Security to make something a notable event and report about it. If we configure it better and have more data models normalized, and then we use it, it will be more helpful. It has been a long-term goal, but we will reach there soon.

Splunk Enterprise Security has helped improve our organization’s ability to ingest data.

Splunk's unified platform has not helped consolidate networking, security, and IT observability tools. I am an engineer, and I am more into administration and creating user interfaces on Splunk Enterprise itself, not Splunk Enterprise Security. We have done some work on Splunk Enterprise Security and then left it with analysts. It is up to the analysts now. Splunk Enterprise Security is not 100% configured. Some basic data models have been set up. They are generating notables, and we are generating alerts out of it, but it is not 100% there. They do have to use other tools such as their networking tools to get a full picture for incident reporting.

One of the most popular features that I personally like is that in the case of an event, I should be able to run a desired action for that on a threshold, but that is not how we are using it right now, unfortunately. We have a pretty manual process. We have an operating procedure, and we follow that. I would like to see it automated. I do not want analysts to decide whether the action needs to be done or not. It should be done provided the policy says so. If the policy says it needs to be done, it should be an automatic process rather than a manual process.

At Splunk .conf24, I saw a demo for Splunk Enterprise Security 8. All the things that they have done in Splunk Enterprise Security 8 are what it can be better at. They have put Mission Control as a part of the notable or finding itself. The investigation shows the findings, and the findings allow us to do everything that we are doing in Mission Control right there on that same screen. That is what we want now. They said it is going to be released in two to three months. We are hoping that we will be able to use it. I was hoping that I would be able to see version 8 when I am here at Splunk .conf24, and when I go back, I would be able to help them implement it, but it is still 7.3.

I have been using Splunk Enterprise Security for two years.

It is pretty stable.

It is pretty scalable. We have a huge deployment. It is good.

We are a huge agency. It is in the public sector. We have 15 terabytes of data.

They are good. We have a huge team of Splunk engineers within our company. Some of them are contractors, and some of them are employees. They are pretty responsive.

Based on my interaction, I would rate them an eight out of ten. Some engineers do not understand what is there to solve, and they start pushing their perspective on the customer, which is not how it should be because it is not their environment.

Positive

We did not use any similar solution previously.

The deployment of Splunk Enterprise Security was very simple.

We have professional service hours. We worked with Splunk engineers, and we had live working sessions. We were doing it like that. We did it for over a period of time, but that did not give us the full power of Splunk Enterprise Security. For that, we need to be able to configure our own data models and normalize the data. That is not happening 100%.

It is quite expensive.

We did not evaluate any similar solutions.

At this time, I cannot assess Splunk Enterprise Security in terms of the ability to identify and solve problems in real time, but we do use regular Splunk to pinpoint a lot of problems. It helps us a lot. We are able to pinpoint a lot of things, whether they are vulnerabilities or pointing to some logs in the firewall or authentication logs. All the analysts use it very frequently to write searches.

Splunk Enterprise Security has not helped improve our organization’s business resilience because we are not 100% dependent on it. 

Splunk Enterprise Security can provide us with the relevant context to help guide our investigations. However, the input is not 100% perfect, so the output is not 100% perfect.

I would rate Splunk Enterprise Security a ten out of ten.