Splunk Enterprise Security Reviews

Our primary use case is for cyber security, tracking logs, and incident response.

I haven't had the chance to properly sink my teeth into Enterprise Security but so far I like that they added the MITRE ATT&CK features. 

This feature helps us know how to plan when we have an incident, know where to look, what to look for, and aspects like that. 

The MITRE ATT&CK planning is valuable. When we see those incidents and those logs, having the information right there speeds up the process a bit.

We did not have a SIEM at the time, so we added Enterprise Security as our SIEM. We're hoping to learn more about it and grow as we progress.

They wanted us to do basic training, which was offered to our organization for free. That was great. However, ours is a cybersecurity focus. The training was mostly sales-focused, like how to monitor your sales. It was hard to then come back from doing the training and try to switch it to a cybersecurity focus because all the training we did was sales oriented. The basic training didn't really touch on any kind of cybersecurity use cases or anything like that. That would have been great to see in the training.

We upgraded to Enterprise Security a year ago but have been using general Splunk for longer. 

Stability-wise, despite these issues, it's been solid. I haven't had any issues with access to it or anything like that. The only issue we did have was with the engineer. After informing him of those issues, he went back and tweaked them, and then everything worked fine. 

It seems pretty scalable. Our network isn't extremely large, so I don't think scalability will be an issue in our case, but I definitely see the opportunity to scale if needed.

We have around 8,000 devices, so it's a fairly small network. It's across several different networks.

I have not used support yet mainly because I haven't delved into it as much because of the issues with our initial integration with our engineer not being so trained. 

We have different contractors and they have other solutions. Some of those solutions included Elastic. We want to use Splunk and our contractors want to use Elastic. We're hoping .conf23 will broaden our imagination, so we'll have more to bring back and push towards just using Splunk only.

I have not used Elastic myself. It does sound like it does a lot. There's a lot that Splunk offers that we haven't actually used. I want to play with Mission Control. We only use Enterprise Security but I do want Mission Control where everything is in one centralized application where you don't have to jump to different applications. 

I would love to get Mission Control.

My engineer had a little bit of an issue with it but it was because of his own lack of training. We were pushed to hurry up and get a SIEM. He did the best he could. I let him know what wasn't working, and then he would try to fix what he could on the backend so it could work. He was in talks with Splunk to fix those issues. The results are coming back a bit better, but I think that there is still room for improvement.

I was not involved with the setup. I came in afterward. One of our guys here was the one that was in the initial integration of Splunk. We ended up with Splunk as our main SIEM. I've never had any issues with it and I enjoyed it. 

We will see cost efficiencies mainly just from saving time and the shortened time and response to those incidents that we see. The fact that everything's organized in one application, we should see a bit of an increase in efficiency.

I do see the possibility and the opportunity to increase the meantime to resolution by a lot. We use several different applications to monitor logs. We have the vision. 

I've seen some of the updates and changes like Splunk AI and Splunk Vision Control that look nice. I didn't manage to get on some of the hands-on, which would have been lovely. I would like to get more ideas on how we can integrate Splunk into our networks. 

I would rate Splunk Enterprise Security a nine out of ten. I see the opportunity and I'm hoping with our engineer that we can get to where we can make the best use of Splunk. It really seems great. A lot of our staff here were all ready to use it. We're just hoping our engineer can get to the place where we can actually make use of it. 

The biggest value I get from attending a Splunk conference is being able to see the updates, changes, the features they're adding, the Splunk AI, and Splunk Vision Control. That's been nice. I am looking forward to some of the sessions. I want to get more ideas on how we can integrate Splunk into our networks and things like that, especially focusing on cybersecurity. I would also like to see some of the stock sessions because it's a brand new stock. We're trying to stand it up. Seeing how they're using it for stocks would be great.

Our primary use case is for security audit log collection correlation. We wanted something that the security team could focus on versus going directly into our enterprise. We had some initial use cases to supplement our IT ops security into one product. We had a SIEM but not one that was as customizable as Splunk Enterprise Security.

The out-of-the-box capabilities that Enterprise Security offers were very helpful. We're not using it anymore because it was almost overkill. We have shifted to go back to just the core functionality. We were inundated with the amount of alerts and alarms that we could get out of it. It is also a resource hog and we didn't have the resources to support it on-prem so we're taking it offline now.

We saw the granularity that we could get from Splunk far exceeded what we already had. We had the ability to have our security team really focus on the platform and stay within the platform, but they could correlate with a variety of other stakeholders, and our stakeholders were growing. So we tried to get ahead of that and filter it in to create customizable KPIs for those user groups versus having a one-size-fits-all approach. That unique was very helpful for us to expand upon. The driving force is resources, and we were lacking those.

We use it to monitor multiple clouds. We weren't leveraging it for all of our clouds, but we have a presence in GCP, AWS, and Azure. The unity and uniformity across all of it would have been great but at that stage, we were only using it for on-prem coverage. We would like to go ahead and understand how we can implement it as a cloud solution as we are increasing our daily footprint too. We weren't really prepared to understand the workflows we already had in the CSPs or the new integrations of data lakes at a warehouse that were and are still being built out to get Enterprise Security to function off of that too. We hadn't gotten to that stage.

A lot of what we were doing was done manually in terms of vulnerability and remediation and is still being done manually now. Evolving to a stage where the alerts weren't inundating our customers and getting familiar with the product would have helped us perhaps get a bit more functionality and usability out of it. We are seeing some value out of Enterprise Security and think we can get similar results elsewhere. I think that down the road, as our understanding gets better of how we want framework requirements, Enterprise Security could come back into the picture.

I have been using Splunk Enterprise Security for around twelve months.

Stability had its drawbacks because of how much it consumes. We had to justify whether or not it was worth keeping it up. The decision was to not keep up with it.

We are only on-prem so we do manual scaling. We don't have the elasticity that we would have in the cloud which limited us. Justifiably, in order to scale up the platform, we would have to go through procurements and more hardware, which was not an option. So we were limited, and we knew that. We had done pilots and buildout but a hardware refresh cycle was coming up, we had to justify whether or not it was in the cards.

I've been working with Splunk for several years now, and I've always found them very responsive and supportive in a variety of technologies around core functionality like Enterprise Security and ITSI. 

I would rate them an eight out of ten. They have a strong team through and through from the pre-presales all the way through architectural changes and shifts that we need to do to address the customer.

Positive

We've had numerous implementations of SIEM solutions over the years. Splunk offered a lot of capabilities on top of some of our old antiquated Sentinel and Azure. We had many other products before we pursued Enterprise Security. But we weren't in a position to really go down the Enterprise Security route because we hadn't quite fleshed out what our end goal was.

We're still in the evaluation stages. Looking at Enterprise Security, given the fact that we already have an investment in Splunk, it makes sense. We would like to see it grow beyond just Enterprise Security to more of not just observability, but pro actions to utilize the source of that nature. 

We had great success potentially going into a SOAR from Enterprise Security. We hadn't quite evolved to that point yet. At this stage, it's just not really in our pipeline to pursue Enterprise Security until we get a better understanding of our requirements.

Refining those playbooks and so forth also is going to take time. We have customers who have categorically unique requirements. From a security standpoint, one group's security requirements are going to be different from some of the other teams that we have. We are trying to find that uniformity across the board. We may have to entertain multiple security solutions to meet their needs.

My role was to support a lot of the backend and the configuration of the platform as it was being established.

The level of difficulty was on par with the Splunk Enterprise core. My team was involved with a lot of the provisioning from the virtual environment and on-prem to support it. It wasn't overly complicated. Once it was up it took a lot of resources. Evaluating and seeing whether or not we could actually move it to the cloud when the core functionality still existed on-prem, we weren't willing to split them at this stage.

We would almost always have Splunk support through the deployment and configuration stages of it. It was always solid. Once we had the platform up and running, we had to consider general operations and maintenance. While the Splunk team was great and the resources are available, there is a finite amount of resources on-site.

Splunk is not cheap. That's definitely a consideration as we look at other products.

We haven't seen much time to value using the solution system but it wasn't necessarily a fault of the product. It was the cycles to maintain it and support it, to make sure it's growing correctly. We hadn't gotten to that stage. Our ROI and TCO, given the fact that its footprint is being looked at because of what it takes to maintain it in terms of resources. We have the core platform, and then we have a growing license. We're looking at how we can efficiently use Enterprise Security. It's just not there at this point.

I would rate Splunk Enterprise Security an eight out of ten. I think the rating has the potential to be higher. If we had time to flesh it out and vet some of the core capabilities of Enterprise Security and how it could benefit us over the core. Getting to that stage requires a lot more customer engagement on our side that we weren't really prepared to do because of budgetary constraints, hardware refresh cycles, and so forth. Overall, we dropped the product not necessarily because of a lack of capability, it was more along the lines that the timing wasn't appropriate for our security teams.

The biggest value I get from attending a Splunk conference is knowledge transfer. I work in the public so it's valuable having a lot of conversations with fellow colleagues who are in the public sector and hearing their hurdles. We don't want to reinvent the wheel every time, and we don't want to hit obstacles that could have been lessons learned. The conference is a really good opportunity to see what's new, what's out there, and how it can blend in with our current architecture and designs. It also helps to understand what's not going to work to be able to get ahead of it before questions come up. We can properly equip our customers and answer their questions. The Splunk conference is a good brain dump.

We primarily use the solution for monitoring, intrusion detection, and prevention. It is mostly a lot of security and network and server monitoring.

It automated the way we look at intrusion detection and prevention. It automatically picks up intrusion attempts within our environment.

The monitoring and the security functionality are the most valuable aspects of the solution.

It is easy to set up.

It is very scalable. 

You can basically make it do whatever you want, from log management and monitoring security, intrusion detection, prevention, and linking to your antivirus to report to it. Having kind of a single point where everything feeds in and create dashboards however you like is useful and works with how many ever systems you want in that dashboard.

I've not come across any areas that need improvement.

I'd like to see more integration with more antivirus systems.

We've used the solution for roughly, one year and a half years.

The solution is highly scalable.

We have four people that use the solution and they were split between infrastructure and security.

We don't have a plan to increase usage as we're almost at capacity with our servers, for our purposes. I don't think we're going to scale it as we're using everything we can from anything we need. However, it's intensely used for security purposes.

Technical support is perfect.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It was done by Splunk entirely. After that, the configuration took a bit of time, however, we bought professional service days from them to help us build the configuration.

The full deployment took about five months due to the fact that we have quite a lot of servers.

I'd rate the experience a five out of five in terms of ease of execution. 

The amount of people you require for deployment and maintenance depends on the complexity of the environment. It can be run and managed by a single person if the environment is not highly complex. If you're talking about probably less than 200 servers, and a couple of network endpoints, one person can manage it easily after it's been configured. Otherwise, I wouldn't be able to say. In more complex environments where you've got several geographical locations, several data centers in geographical locations, and so on, you'd probably need more than one.

Splunk handled the implementation. It was a joint effort between them bringing the knowledge and us doing the actual work.

It's a great investment, especially if you want to strengthen your security stance.

It's yearly a yearly license on a three-year contract. On a three-year contract, you get a discount basically - rather than putting it on a rolling yearly contract.

On pricing, if I base it on the functionality of the system out of the box, I would rate it five out of five.

They have several prepackaged modules you can purchase. For example, for the security type, they have Security Enterprise, with the default products getting security essentials. With Infrastructure, the same. We've got an ITOps enterprise, which again, is payable on top of the standard license. 

It's pretty much how much you can actually build in-house. The difference between AT&T, LogRhythm, and Splunk, while AT&T and LogRhythm are pretty out of the box (it's click and configure), Splunk is highly configurable. 

You can make it do whatever you want to, as long as you know how to edit the configuration files. What ITOps and Security Enterprise do, instead of you having to build all that from the ground up, so the dashboards, the logic behind it, the configuration files, and so on, become prepackaged and pre-installed.

We did test AT&T and LogRhythm as well. We chose this solution as a balance between cost and functionality.

AT&T was a great security tool, however, it lacked a lot of the infrastructure things that Splunk does, in terms of server monitoring and network monitoring. LogRhythm did have a dose, however, at a very prohibitive price. It was almost twice the cost of Splunk.

We've got a version of Splunk Cloud. I'm not sure of which version.

I'd advise users to get more professional service days. You get five professional service days with the product, when you buy the license, usually. Definitely get at least ten more.

You need to have some strategy before. You definitely need a strategy. Before you do your PS days, definitely have a look at your strategy and make sure you've arranged your questions rather diligently. Based on how you think you're going to use the system, where you are where you want to be, just box them into separate parts - security, infrastructure, and monitoring. It's going to make life a lot easier when you talk to consultants as the consultants are very, very knowledgeable. However, you need to ask the right questions.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We are using Splunk in the standard information security use case. We're also using it for various application use cases around identity management, windows active directory, and those types of use cases.

Splunk has provided a venue for us to determine student engagement during COVID, for which we didn't really have any other way except by looking at data that we captured off of our student systems and our authentication servers to see who's logging in, and who's logging out, and for how long they've been logged in.

The feature that I have found most valuable with Splunk is the ability to sift through a bunch of data very quickly.

We have about a 500 gig license with Splunk, so it's not like petabytes of data, but even 500 gigs is kind of hard to sift through sometimes.

Splunk has been improving consistently over the last couple of revs. I still think there are some administrative features that they could improve on and make them less kludgy, but from a user perspective, it has gotten very clean and very sexy looking over the last few builds. So the users seem to like it.

By less kludgy, I mean that in the version I'm running, I still have to go into the command line and modify files and then go into the GUI and validate that they got modified. So it's not all in the GUI, but it has been moving slowly to the GUI over the last several versions. It would be nice if they could move all of the administrative features into a GUI platform so that when you're in the Splunk distributed environment management platform, you then don't have to go into the command line to add new applications or new packages that you then want to be able to push out to your forwarders. Their forwarder management is still kind of split that way.

I don't really have any feature requests in Splunk's space. They seem to be doing a good job of keeping it contemporary from that perspective. 

Splunk's mission is to move everyone to the cloud and charge us a bunch more money. Their goal is to cloud source everything, and quite honestly, the price of cloud sourcing the product, even at smaller 500 gigs a day (which isn't a lot of data by Splunk standards) in the cloud for that is ludicrous. The cost for me to buy equipment every three years and own licensing and run it local to my prem, is significantly less from a three or five year license. I'm going to spend X amount of money on hardware every X years, and I'm going to have to pay licensing costs on software of X over that same period versus that amount that I'd amortize over five years is what I would be paying every year in the cloud.

That is the point with the product. It seems like they are so focused on forcing everyone into the cloud that they seem to be not understanding that there are people that don't have those really deep pockets. It's one thing for a Fortune 50 company to spend a million dollars a year in the cloud. It's another thing when you're a nonprofit educational institute to spend that kind of money in the cloud. Even though we do get some discounts in most of the cloud space providers, it is still not on par with the big public businesses.

I have been using Splunk for probably 10 years.

At least in our environment, it is super stable. When you think about how much time you spend working with other applications, just Windows Server requires more feeding than Splunk does, you see that Splunk is a very low maintenance care and feeding product.

We have probably 150 users in the environment and their roles vary from being application management folks to application engineering folks to the executive suite, so lots of different use cases. The executive suite tend to prefer more curated content and the application owners have a mix of curated content and dynamic search functions they can perform. Then the engineering tier basically gets some curated content and some free reign to do whatever they want for the most part. I'm the guy that supports this instance. So there's one person.

I support not only Splunk, but I am also the campus security engineer and I'm also the dude that runs or is responsible for all of our campus monitoring infrastructure. So that tells you how little maintenance is required.

We are adding new use cases on a fairly regular basis and we are adding more licensing to our indexing license. I don't see Splunk going away. There's nothing else that I think provides the ability to do this much data analytics from just the numbers of equipment that you need to run it. Also, the number of people that you need to actually make sure that it's functioning well. In higher ed., everybody always says we should do open source. And I respond that what I do in Splunk with 20 systems, I would need three racks of equipment to do on an open source platform. I have basically 70 - 75% of the racks now and I'd need three times that or more to run this as an open source product. And it wouldn't be as cute and it wouldn't be as beautiful or as flexible.

I know other folks in the higher ed. space that are running petabyte size instances with Splunk. So I would have to say it scales very well just from talking to the folks in my market silo.

Their technical support sucks.

My engagement with their technical support was for a product which they basically took over from an open source product and they just seemed to not be able to figure out why it's not doing what it's supposed to do. The number of times I've had to engage with Splunk for solutions has been for a couple of use cases. And in every one of those use cases, support was very painful. It took a very long time and it seemed like they were more interested in burning their queue volume than actually satisfying me as a customer.

I work in higher ed. Here in higher ed., it costs us a lot of money to run it. The support from the company that you spend a lot of money with is pretty poor. I get most of my support through the Splunk sales folks because they seem to know more and they're more incentivized to keep me as a customer. When I call in to open a ticket with Splunk support, they really don't know, and this is going to sound terrible, they don't really care whether I have a 50 Meg license or a 50 petabyte license. If it's not on their workflow, their pre-programmed triage, they can't do it.

Splunk came into being at Case Western when we were looking for a better log product than Check Point was providing at that point in time. My entire investment in Splunk, in hardware and software and integration cost, was cheaper than what Check Point was going to provide, or what the Check Point solution path was for just looking at firewall data. We knew we needed to be able to do more analytics than what we were currently getting out of our firewall products and Splunk was brought in to do that. It can do this and a whole lot more.

Splunk is a complex critter to put in and it's a more complex critter to keep running. We have 10 search heads and four indexers and universal and a heavy forwarding cluster. We have clustered indexers and clustered search heads. This is definitely not a drag and drop product.

We engaged a third party Splunk integrator to help us do our Splunk deployment and they did our initial deployment. We used a different integrator to do some of our upgrades, which we probably won't use again. Our implementation strategy was we really just wanted to look at the classic security use case when we put this in 10 years ago. Then after that came in, and everybody was happy with what it was doing, we added some other use cases and universal forwarding and so on and so forth.

We used an integrator.

The integrator we used to do our initial deployment was excellent. The integrator we used to do our last round of upgrades was less than excellent.

When I hire an integrator to do an upgrade in an environment, I expect them to come back and say "all of your application layer apps are upgradeable, but your OS's need to be upgraded. Do you want me to do that? Or should you do that?" I now have different versions of OS's under Splunk running in my Linux world and it would've been nice to upgrade the system OS and then upgrade Splunk, even if it was more disruptive. I guess I have to read the statement of work more closely in the future.

The TCO and ROI are really great if you're in the private, non-public sector and you're in a more standard business sector. The return on investment in total cost of ownership on Splunk is from somebody who doesn't fit into that neat silo. Do we calculate that stuff? So our return on investment is by being able to solve problems that we never knew we could solve. My answer to it is the flexibility to be able to figure out student engagement when COVID hit. This was the only platform we could do it on.

I can comment on price in this way - in education in Ohio, we're part of the Ohio supercomputer consortium, and they act as a collective bargaining agent. So we get our licensing as a piece of the State of Ohio's Splunk license. So my pricing is very much not list or even reduced list because of the volume that the state buys.

We generally spend about $20,000 a year in third party integrator costs to get us past some of the rough edges that we get with Splunk support.

We briefly looked at the open source product and we obviously looked at a Check Point product. When we looked at Splunk it seemed like they had a smaller cost to procure it, and a much smaller cost to maintain it than all of those other solutions. So it was kind of why we went with Splunk. This is very non-intuitive since everybody says they love Splunk but it costs too much.

My advice to anyone considering Splunk is to understand exactly how much data you want to look at and you want to bring in on a daily basis. Then create a rational strategy to bring the data in, in reasonably sized chunks, that fulfill a use case at a time.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Splunk a really good nine.

I'd rate it a really good nine because it's really versatile. You can do a lot of things with it. It allows you to do a lot of analytics in the platform without needing a bunch of other third partyware to help you figure it out.

When configuring our use cases and describing the overall purpose of Splunk Enterprise Security, I would focus on the main use cases that I encountered with this tool.

The ease of use and building queries, specifically SQL queries, is notably beneficial as it is easy to build, and the data model itself is very simple. The advanced correlation capabilities are very useful for identifying patterns or malicious activity of users.

I have worked with Splunk Enterprise Security for two years.

I have contacted the Splunk Enterprise Security support team once, but mainly the other team responsible for onboarding contacted them.

I am preparing my master's degree and conducting this review for completing it at KFUPM University, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, located in Saudi Arabia, to prepare for my defense. I have experience with blue team tools, specifically Splunk Enterprise Security and some other solutions.

The company name is Cyberani Solutions, and my email is first name dot last name at cyberanisolutions.com. PeerSpot will create an account and email the login credentials, and my feedback will be published and possibly shared with third parties if I choose to not remain anonymous.

I would rate Splunk Enterprise Security an eight.

We will have clients that generate events through our platform and wish to export those events as data points to Splunk.

The solution improves our customers' integrations. They really want insights into what their users are doing. They want to be alerted to anomalies, general pain points, or popular areas in the integration to understand what's working and what's not.

The metrics and trends that Splunk Enterprise Security generates using all the data points we send allow customers to understand better what their users are doing.

Splunk Enterprise Security should provide a better and richer integration. It has a regimented integration, where we had to build a Python library. It was a very tough way to integrate officially and get into the marketplace. We'd like to see more options so that we can better send data over to the Splunk platform.

The requirements of building the integration had to be a very specific and certain way to get onto your marketplace. Once it's there, it's fine, but it took a little effort to get it exactly that way. That's not as maintainable as we like, so we'd rather that be a more robust integration.

We've had an integration available for the better part of three or four years.

The solution provides good stability.

We haven’t seen any issues with the solution’s scalability.

We mostly interacted with the marketplace community. Although our support experience was not great, the issue was straightforward.

Our customers have seen a return on investment with the solution. We have seen customer satisfaction as it was a highly sought-after integration, and they're happy now that it exists.

The end-to-end visibility that the solution provides into our environment is incredibly important to our organization. We like to see it as the total answer. Any data point can be picked up, and you can really build anything you need from the integration. It's incredibly valuable with the data that it's generating. What the tool provides once integrated is highly valuable and sufficient for us.

Finding any security event across multi-cloud, on-premises, or hybrid environments with Splunk Enterprise Security has been incredibly easy. Using the rest of the Splunk platform, you can trigger whatever you need off the data coming in through the integration.

The solution has helped improve our organization's ability to ingest and normalize data. It also generates more customer activities so that there's a stickier relationship.

The Splunk integration triggers the necessary events so that downstream alerting isn't necessary.

Splunk Enterprise Security has helped speed up our security investigations. It's a great direct integration so that our customers can react quickly when necessary.

In principle, the solution has helped reduce our mean time to resolve, but not necessarily data points that we see as the integrator.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We employed Splunk Enterprise Security for one of our projects. Integrating it into our environment involved opening network ports and making necessary connections.

We had the opportunity to assess visibility in various environments, including on-premises. On-premises visibility has proven to be both satisfactory and advantageous.

We use the threat intelligence management feature. 

We have been considering implementing certain frameworks, such as MITRE ATT&CK or threat topology features.

It contributes value by enhancing resilience, crucial for adopting a Security Information and Event Management solution. Site resilience is imperative for our organization, meeting a key security requirement.

I have been working with it for three years.

It provides good scalability capabilities.

The technical support is among the best in the market. While we didn't have extensive interactions with the support team, we are satisfied with it. It offers support services locally in my country. I would rate it ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward.

The integration and initial setup of Splunk were managed with the assistance of local support.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

The features are fine; they aren't exceptional in any way.

We are using Microsoft 365 and we're using the Exchange Mail Service. It's good for monitoring that in particular. 

The visibility we get has been good. 

Inside threat detection capabilities are good. 

It's helped us to reduce our alert volume a little. I haven't properly calculated it fully so it's hard to lay out a percentage. 

We'd like to have customer service in Hong Kong. I tend to wait a while for their response. We'd like to have more best-practice rules and instructions on how to create a dashboard.

I've only been using Splunk for two years. I make use of it to incorporate other solutions. I need to spend more time mastering Splunk. Sometimes it's a little bit difficult to use. I'd like to get more certificates, et cetera, and have spoken to their main office about that. It's got a high learning curve.

It hasn't helped us speed up security investigations. 

I've been using the solution for about two years. 

I've never had any issues with Splunk's stability.

The solution does not lack scalability. 

I haven't had any communication with Splunk's technical team.

I did not previously use a different solution. 

The setup time is quite long. To this point, I haven't deployed it to all servers and devices. I'm still in the process of deploying. 

I have not evaluated other options. 

We are Splunk customers. 

We do not use it in multiple environments. We just use it on-premises. 

I'm not yet using the threat intelligence features. 

We do not use the mission control feature. 

I have not created any customized dashboards as of now. At some point, I will create one for, for example, Windows Security.

I'm still in the process of mastering threat detection and XDR. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I haven't used it for such a long time, so it's hard to give comprehensive details about the solution.