Vectra AI Reviews

Our key challenges are:

1. People Management: It is always a struggle to coordinate the few people that we have with the necessary skills to put them on the most important topics or projects.
2. Cloud adoption complexity: You need to figure out which systems, applications, and interfaces are talking to which cloud component in terms of data flow. That is a rather complex topic and usually sold well by the external supplier in terms of marketing to a company. Practically speaking, it is very difficult to elaborate all the connection requirements, on-prem to cloud, cloud to cloud, e.g., what is running where, what should run, and what is not running as it should.

Cognito Platform: We are using the latest on-premises version and some of the cloud services too.

We are mainly operating out of Switzerland. The IT Departments are based in our headquarters.

We have a large network with a lot of points of sales and other geographical locations that are interconnected. We need visibility of all the client-initiated traffic to and from our main data centers and to the Internet. We have good network coverage. Vectra is deployed on different hotspots in our network.

We can detect systems that are not behaving right because they are not configured correctly. We detect access to malicious sites or domains that should not be there, which should have been picked up by our security services that we implement at different times at different types of levels in the network. This is kind of an add-on to all the existing prevention mechanisms and helps us with network hygiene.

Due to an optimal signal-to-noise ratio that Vectra delivers, it gives us confidence to have a realistic chance of catching and stopping real attacks on time.

One of its strongest parts is that the solution captures network metadata at scale and enriches it with security information. We forward events to our team, then we can correlate them even better.

We have almost our complete network covered. This solution is like the absolute base coverage for us. You don't get many alerts, and if you get one, you better look at it because it is a good quality alert. After verification, we respond accordingly. Vectra AI brings great visibility. Without it, we would be blind.

The solution has enabled us to do things now that we could not do before. With Streams enabled, we can easily find out who is using SMB v1, as an example. So, it is a kind of hunting in the network. If you have a detection and need proof, you have network capture. In terms of searching accounts or assets, it is a great platform that allows us to use the default search, i.e., searching for a hostname/IP or the advanced queries for complex searches. This allows you to search back in time, which is very convenient, i.e., if one specific host has had detections in the past.

Cognito Streams gives you a detailed view of what happens in the network in the form of rich metadata. It is just a super easy way to capture network traffic for important protocols, giving us an advantage. This is very helpful on a day-to-day basis. 

The Office 365 detection is a great add-on. It will not only see the local traffic, i.e., the local user but also how the user is connecting to the cloud. If communication has been initiated within our network, we would capture anomalies with on-premises mechanisms. If it is a connection from the Internet to O365 SaaS services, we gain visibility through the Vectra add-on. It depends where the communication was started, but we do have a good, complete picture in a single view.

Vectra AI is really focusing on the most critical, severe detections. That is the key point of this platform for us. It gives you enough details and data, if you need it. However, for daily operations, we are just getting the priority 1 alerts that we need, and nothing more.

We use the solution’s Privileged Account Analytics for detecting issues with privileged accounts. This is important to our organization because you need to monitor and control privileged accounts.

The detection model and correlation of events, e.g., you are only having one priority event a day, go hand in hand. They have awesome detection models and very good algorithms. Out-of-the-box, you get a decent severity matrix and great consolidation. This is what has made this platform so usable to us over the last three to four years. We can rely on these detections and on its event generating mechanism that clearly focuses on the most important priority one cases.

If you hit a certain number of rules, triage filters, or groups, the UX responds more slowly. However, we have a complex network and a lot of rules. So, our setup might not be a typical implementation example. We even had UX engineers onsite, and they looked at issues, improvements, and user feedback. Since then, it has gotten a lot better, they even built in features that we specifically requested for our company.

We know that Vectra AI sensors for cloud IaaS deployments have been released and we are planning to deploy those shortly.

We have been using it for four years.

Great! Currently, our Brain shows 190 days uptime (last reboot initiated by us). There have been no operational issues at all. I can't complain.

Scalability is another very good selling point. It is easy to deploy virtual sensors as well as other sensors, which is a big plus.

We have a team of three people, mainly security officers, who are investigating or following up on detections and alerts. We also use the Vectra AI Sidekick Services, which helps a lot by providing a skillful set of people who look into things with a great customer perspective. We have roughly 20 to 30 people who, from time to time, get details on detections or campaigns that they need to look at.

The technical support is fast, customer-oriented, and has a great skill set.

When we started with Vectra AI, we noticed certain things that could be done better from the UI experience and workflow. We had a lot of input. They built this into their software. Some of the features that customers use today are there because we said, "Well, guys do it like that because everybody can profit from that," and they said, "Well, that is a great idea. Let's do it."

Positive

We did not use another solution before Cognito.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

We already had an existing on-prem installation, so adding Office 365 detection was straightforward. It took about half an hour.

After we deployed this solution in our network, it took about two weeks for it to begin to add value to our security operations.

They brought in the requirements and said, "We need this amount of time, as well as this type of rack, space, power, and network configuration." We prepared that, then they were able to set things up in a very short manner. It took maybe a day, then we were set and traffic was flowing in. This was one of our smoothest installations in the last years. After two days, we saw all the needed network traffic. So, implementation and initial setup were very fast.

We are still a happy customer after four years.

In terms of detection, we have seen ROI from finding out stuff as well as preventing, hunting, and intelligence gathering.

Cost is a big factor, as always. However, I think we have a very good price–performance ratio.

We looked at least five different vendors, including Cisco and Darktrace, in PoCs.

Vectra AI said what they are able to do in terms of detection and performance in their sales pitch, which they proved later in their technical PoC, to the point. They were actually the only ones who could.

Vectra AI has a very short deployment time compared to other solutions that we tried.

Do a PoC. Only a PoC will show you if something works or not. I know it takes time but do a POC or a test installation. We did the PoC directly in the production network, which was the best thing to do as we got results very quickly.

Vectra AI enables you to see more. It is their visibility strength that makes the platform so great. Because they really look at severity conditions and do a great correlation, it is time invested wisely. If Vectra shows a high score threat, you must look after it.

In terms of our security stack, this is the most essential cybersecurity tool we use. We are planning to use Vectra as well in the cloud. If they are able to deliver the same performance and capabilities in the cloud sensor, then it will be a really strong foundation that everybody should have in one way or the other.

There is manual input i.e., Triaging is something that you have to do. But in terms of workflow, it has been designed by security people for security people. It provides a very smooth and fast way to set up manual rules or triage filters.

I would rate this solution as 10 out of 10.

The key challenge we face is visibility, things that happen in isolated and pocketed environments where visibility is limited. Silos and isolated networks exist across the environment, and it's difficult to control it completely. Blind spots are the main challenges.

With this solution, the focus has changed from reactive to more proactive, because all the other SOAR and EDR solutions, firewalls, and IPSs are generally reactive. With those tools, when most things are triggered, it means you are already slightly late. With Vectra, we become more proactive than reactive. More often than not, we pick things up before the actual damage can start. It picks up things that none of our other tools pick up because it's designed to detect things before harm is done, at the initial stages. This is one of the main benefits and the biggest business justification and use case for us.

It reduces the time it takes to respond to attacks because we find out about a threat in the beginning so we can stop it before it can cause harm, rather than reacting when the damage is done and significantly more effort is needed.

And since it is not preventive, it does not trigger any adverse reactions. For example, sometimes we have seen, with certain kinds of malware or ransomware, that they tend to get more aggressive if they realize that something is stopping them, but that doesn't happen with detection tools like Vectra.

For capturing network metadata at scale and enriching it with security information, that's where the second product comes in, Cognito Recall. It takes enriched network metadata and keeps that information available for you to access, whether it triggers a detection or not. For example, if you want to check who is using SSL version 3, TLS version 1.0, SNMP version 1, SNMP version 2, or who is using clear text passwords, even though they don't trigger a detection in Cognito Detect, that metadata is available. Of course, the duration of that data is dependent on how much storage we can buy from Vectra. That's a financial constraint and we have opted for one month. We might look at expanding that further.

That metadata helps in closing vulnerabilities. For instance, if there is a TLS version or an encryption level that we want to deprecate, it is very useful for us, because we can also generate reports. We know which systems are using SNMP version 1 or SNMP version 2. Even though it has more features and you can create custom detections through Recall, we've not gone that far. For us, this has been our most common use case: protocols and communications that we would like to stop or close. This provides useful data.

The solution also provides visibility into behaviors across the full lifecycle of an attack, beyond just the internet gateway. It provides the whole MITRE Framework and the key chain—recon, command and control. It has detections under each of those categories, and it picks them up within the network. In fact, most of the detections are internal. Internet-based detections comprise 25 to 30 percent, and those are based on encrypted traffic. And most of the time when we validate, we see that it's genuine because it's a call from a support vendor where large files need to be uploaded. That gives us an opportunity to validate with that end-user as well: What was happening, what did you transfer?

We used to have SIEM and antivirus solutions and we would get a lot of alerts. Those alerts resulted in a lot of effort to refine them and yet we still needed a lot of effort to analyze the information. Vectra does all of that automatically for us, and what it produces, in the end, is something that can easily be done by one person. In fact, you don't even need one.

The most useful feature is the anomaly detection because it's not signature-based. It picks up the initial part of any attack, like the recon and those aspects of the kill chain, very well. We've had numerous red team and penetration exercises and, at the initial stage, when the recon is happening and credentials are used and lateral movement is attempted, our existing tools don't pick it up because it has not yet been "transformed" into something malicious. But Vectra, at that stage, picks it up 80 to 90 percent of the time. That has been one of the biggest benefits because it picks up what other things don't see, and it picks them up at the beginning when attackers are trying to do something rather than when the damage is already done.

The ability to roll up numerous alerts to create a single incident or campaign for investigation takes a bit of effort in the beginning because you'll always have misconfigurations, such as wrong passwords, that could trigger brute force and SMB-types of alerts. And you'll have genuine behaviors in your environment that tend to be suspicious, such as vulnerability assessment and scanning tools, that are not noise, per se. Even if they're non-malicious, it always tends to point to events like misconfigurations and security tools. It's been very useful in that sense, in that, once we do the initial triaging, indicating that this is a security tool, or that is a misconfiguration we need to correct, it reduces the noise quite significantly. We don't get more than 10 to 20 events, maximum, generated per day.

Vectra shows what it does in terms of noise reduction, and we can see that it is down to only 1 percent, and sometimes even less than 1 percent, of what actually requires a person to act on.

It becomes quite easy for a SOC analyst to handle things without being overburdened. And, obviously, it's at the initial stage because it picks things up before the damage happens. It's not the kind of prevention tool that has signatures and that only tells you something bad has already happened. It tells you that something is not right or is suspicious. It says there is a behavior that we have not seen before, and it has always been effective in the red team exercises that we periodically conduct.

Also, we have privileged account management, but we don't have a separate analytics tool. Still, Vectra also picks that up. This is also something that has come up during red team exercises. If there's an account that is executing an escalated privilege or running a service that it normally doesn't run, it gets flagged. It tells us about lateral movements and privilege escalations; things that constitute non-standard usage. It's quite effective at catching these. I have yet to see a red team exercise that doesn't generate any alerts in Vectra. We see a jump, and it's very easy to identify the account and the system that is the source.

It also triages threats and correlates them with the compromised host devices, because it maps both ways. It maps the host, the account, and the detection, and vice versa. You can also go to the detection and see how many affected hosts there are. In addition, if there's a particular detection, is there an existing campaign? How many hosts are also doing the same thing? These are the kinds of visibility the tool provides.

The reporting from Cognito Detect is very limited and doesn't give you too many options. If I want to prepare a customized report on a particular host, even though I see the data, I have to manually prepare the report. The reporting features that are built into the tool are not very helpful. They are very generic and broad. That's one main area that I keep telling Vectra they need to improve. 

Also, whenever there's a software upgrade and new detections are introduced and the intelligence improves, there is a short period at the beginning where there's a lot of noise. Suddenly, you will get a burst of detections because it's a new detection. It's a new type of intelligence they've introduced and it takes some time to learn. We get worried and we always check whether an upgrade has happened. Then we say, "Okay, that must be the reason." I would like to see an improvement wherein, whenever they do an upgrade, that transition is a bit smoother. It doesn't happen all the time, but sometimes an upgrade triggers noise for some time until it settles down.

We've been using the Vectra AI for over three years.

In the beginning, there is a struggle to fine-tune it because it will generate noise for the reasons I mentioned. But once that learning phase is complete, it's quite reliable. We have been using the hardware for more than three years and there have been no failures or RMAs

Upgrades happen automatically. We have never gone into the appliance to do an upgrade, even though it's on-prem. It all happens automatically and seamlessly in the background. 

Initially, we had some problems with the Recall connection to the cloud, to establish the storage connectivity. But again, these kinds of things are at the beginning. After that, it is quite stable. We've not had any problems.

Scalability for the cloud solution is straightforward. For the on-prem solution, you need to take care of the capacity and the function itself, because the capacity of the same hardware varies, depending on what you use it for. From a capacity point of view, there is some effort required in the design.

Looking forward to the future, the tool integrates with more and more solutions outside of its existing intelligence. It's not something that we have yet embarked on, but that's an interesting area in which we would like to invest some time.

The cloud solution is something that has limited visibility because PaaS and SaaS in the cloud are always a challenge in terms of cyber security. And in the future, even though we have taken the Vectra SaaS for O365, they're also coming up with a PaaS visibility tool. It is currently under testing, and we are one of the users that have been chosen to participate in the beta testing of that. That's another thing in the future that would add a lot of value in terms of visibility.

Currently, we have about 8,000 users.

The support is directly from the device or we get a response via email. The response is okay. Because the product is stable, we have not been in a situation where we urgently needed something and we wanted support right now. We have never tested that kind of fast response. They take some time to respond, but whenever we have requested something, it has not been urgent. 

We do get a response and issues always get resolved. We haven't had any lingering issues. They have all been closed.

Positive

We did not have any tools in the same league. We had security tools, but not with anomaly detection as part of the feature set.

Cognito Detect is on-prem and Cognito Recall is in the cloud, as is the O365 and Azure AD protection.

The cloud setup is extremely simple. The on-prem takes some effort. There is the sizing, depending on what model. The throughput varies. Those kinds of on-prem design considerations create a bit of complexity in the beginning, but the cloud is straightforward. All it needs is the requisite access to the tenant. Once it gets that, it starts its work. 

In the beginning, there is some effort in fine-tuning things, but that comes as part of the package with the solution. They have a success manager and tech analyst assigned to support you in the beginning. Once that is done, the product is very stable.

For us, there were an initial four to eight weeks of triaging and clearing the noise, in terms of misconfiguration issues or known security tools. After that time, we started seeing value.

We only used the people from Vectra.

Vectra is a bit on the higher side in terms of price, but they have always been transparent. The reason that they are this good is that they invest, so they need to charge accordingly. They are above average when it comes to price. They're not very economical but it's for a good reason. As long as we get quality, we are okay with paying the extra amount.

We did a PoC with Darktrace recently as part of our regular exercise of giving other solutions an opportunity, but the PoC didn't meet our requirements. It didn't detect what Vectra detects in a red team situation.

The deployment time is similar because they all need the same thing. They need the network feed for a copy of the network traffic. The base requirements are the same.

My advice is that you need to size it right and identify what your capacity will be. And you need to place it right, because it's as helpful as what it can see, so you need to have an environment that supports that. What we did, as part of implementing Vectra, was implement an effective packet broker solution in our environment. It needs that support system to function properly. It needs copies of your traffic for detection because it doesn't have an agent sitting anywhere. The positioning and packet brokering are critical allies for this solution.

We have it deployed on-premises. However, we are in the process of acquiring O365 and Azure AD as well. When it comes to Power Automate and other deeper anomalies, these are things that we have on the cloud in Azure. In the new module, it lets us know if any automation, scripts, or large, sudden downloads, or access from a country that is different from where the user has normally been, are happening. But this is a very new tool. We are yet to familiarize ourselves with it and do the fine-tuning. We don't have any automation or any such functions happening on-prem.

In terms of correlating behaviors in the enterprise network and data centers with behaviors in the cloud environment, because we have taken the O365 module, it gives us good correlation between an on-prem user and his behavior in the cloud. We have seen that sometimes it detects that an account is disabled, for example, on-prem, and it says somebody downloaded a lot of data just a few days before that or uploaded large data a few days before that. It does those kinds of correlations.

We have one SOC but it's based overseas. It's an offsite managed service and it covers the gambit of incident detection and response. It's an always-available service. The SIEM we are using is RSA NetWitness, and the EDR solution we use is McAfee.

Vectra has some automation features, in the sense of taking action through the firewalls or other integrations, but that's a journey that we have not yet embarked on. As long as we have a continuously available SOC that rapidly responds to the alerts it generates, we are okay. In general, I'm not comfortable with the automation part. Accurate detection is more important for me. Prevention, when something is picked up too late, as is the case with some of the other solutions I mentioned, is a different case. But here, when it is at the preliminary stage, prevention seems a bit too harsh.

The original use case was because we had some legacy stuff that doesn't do encryption at rest. Compliancy-wise, we had to put in some additional mitigating actions to protect it. That was the start of it. Then, we extended it to check other devices/servers within our network as well.

We are on the latest version.

It is doing some artificial intelligence. If it sees a server doing a lot of things, then it will assume that is normal. So, it is looking for anomalous behavior, things that are out of context which helps us reduce time. Therefore, we don't have to look in all the logs. We just wait for Vectra to say, "This one is behaving strange," then we can investigate that part.

We have implemented it fully now. We have done some training and filtering on it. Now, every alert that we see means that we need to investigate. It sees roughly 300 events a day. The majority are normal behavior for our company. So, there are about 10 to 15 events a day that we need to investigate.

The solution triages threats and correlates them with compromised host devices. It looks at a certain IP address, and if you're doing something strange, then it will give us an alert. E.g., normally John Doe is logged into it for four days, going to server XYZ. If all of a sudden, it's in a different timescale, going to server B, then it will send us an alert.

We have privileged accounts. They have a specific names, and if I see those names, then I investigate a bit more thoroughly. That's our policy. I don't know whether Vectra does anything different with them.

The solution gives us more tickets. If we did not have Vectra, we wouldn't have those tickets. So, it's actually increasing them. However, it is improving our security with a minimum amount of work. That's the whole purpose of the device. We have 10 to 15 events that we need to look into a day, and that is doable.

The solution creates more work for us, but it is work that we are supposed to do. We need more FTEs because we need more security.

We mainly use it for the detection types, checking dark IPS or command-and-control traffic. 

We bought Recall so we can have more information. Recall is an addition onto Vectra. We haven't enabled Recall yet, but we will. So, if there is an incident, we can investigate it a bit further with Vectra devices before going into other tools and servers. This gives us the metadata for network traffic. So, if we have a detection, we can check with Recall what other traffic we are seeing from that device, if there is anything else. It's mainly a quick and dirty way of looking at it and getting some extra information to see whether it's malicious.

We found that the solution captures network metadata at scale and enriches it with security information. This is one of the reasons why we added Recall, so the alert gives us information on where we need to look, then we can investigate a bit further. For example, a certain device is sending data to command-and-control server, then we can investigate whether that is really happening or just a false alarm with the metadata in Recall. It makes it easier to find out.

We would like to see more information with the syslogs. The syslogs that they send to our SIEM are a bit short compared to what you can see. It would be helpful if they send us more data that we can incorporate into our SIEM, then can correlate with other events. We have mentioned this to Vectra.

It does some things that I find strange, which might be the artificial intelligence. E.g., sometimes you have a username for a device, then it makes another. It detects the same device with another name, and that's strange behavior. This is one of the things that we have with Vectra support at the moment, because the solution is seeing the device twice. 

We started the pilot roughly a year ago. So, we started small with a pilot on part of the systems, then with two other vendors. Afterwards, we decided to buy it.

Now, it's almost in production. It's still a project in the end phase, as we are still implementing it. But, most of it has been running for a year.

So far, the stability has been good. There are no issues. It's never been down. It has been updating automatically on a regular basis and there are no issues with that where it has stopped working.

One person will be responsible for the deployment, maintenance, and physical upkeep; a person from the service delivery team will keep the device up and running. The security analysts (my team) deal with the alerts and filtering.

The part that we designed is not really scalable. They have options, and there is some room for improvement. If we need to scale up, which we have no intention of doing, then the physical devices need to be swapped over for a bigger one. Other than that, we have some leeway. This came up in the design with, "What are your requirements?" and those requirements have been met, so that's fine. They will probably be met for the foreseeable future.

At the moment, we don't have Tier 1 and Tier 2. Instead, we have a small team who does everything. I am mostly using it. There will be three security analysts. Then, we have a number of information security officers (ISOs) who will have a read-only role, where they can see alerts to keep an eye on them, if they want, and be able to view the logging and see if they need more information. But, there are three people who will be working with Vectra alerts.

We are in contact with the Vectra service desk. If you send them ideas, they talk about them and see if they can incorporate them.

We decided that we wanted to have an alert within 30 minutes, which is doable with this solution. It fulfills our needs. However, we didn't have this before, so it has increased our time, but for things we need to do.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward. They have security on a high level. There are a lot of logins with passwords and very long passwords. This made it go a bit longer. However, the implementation is relatively easy compared to other devices.

We made a design. That's what we implemented.

Initially, it was set up in conjunction with Vectra. When we put it into production, the majority was done by me, then checked by a Vectra engineer. If I had issues, I just contacted Vectra support and they guided me through the rest of it.

The Vectra team is nice and helpful. The service desk is fast. They know what they are doing, so I have no complaints on that part. We have a customer service person who knows about our environment and can ask in-depth questions. He came over as well for the implementation to check it, and that was fine. The work was well done.

The solution has reduced the time it takes us to respond to attacks. It sends an email to our SIEM solution. From that SIEM solution, we get emails and tickets. Therefore, the time between an alert coming up and a ticket is reduced. This is for tickets that we monitor regularly. Within 15 to 20 minutes, it gives us an alert for the things that we want. Thus, it has greatly reduced our measurable baseline.

The return of investment is we have tested it so sometimes we have auditors who do pen tests and see them. That's the goal. It seems to be working. We haven't found any actual hackers yet, so I'm not completely a 100 percent certain. However, we found auditors who are trying to do pen tests, which essentially the same thing.

The license is based on the concurrent IP addresses that it's investigating. We have 9,800 to 10,000 IP addresses. 

There are additional features that can be purchased in addition to the standard licensing fee, such as Cognito Recall and Stream. We have purchased these, but have not implemented them yet. They are part of the licensing agreement.

We investigated Darktrace, Vectra, and Cisco Stealthwatch.

Darktrace and Vectra plus Recall were similar in my opinion. Darktrace was a bit more expensive and complex. Vectra has a very nice, clean web GUI. It easier to understand and cheaper, which is one of the main reasons why we chose Vectra over Darktrace.

Darktrace and Vectra are very different, but eventually for what we wanted it to do, they almost did the same thing. Because Darktrace was a bit more expensive, it was a financial decision in the end.

I did the comparison between Darktrace and Vectra. They did almost the same thing. Sometimes, there are differences that Darktrace did detect and Vectra didn't. For the majority, we didn't find any actual hackers. So, it's all false positives, eventually. Both of them are very similar. The big thing is the hacker activity. They both detected it in the same way. But, in the details, they were different.

The options for Stealthwatch were a bit limited in our opinion for what we wanted it to do. Stealthwatch is network data, and that's it.

Start small and simple. Work with the Vectra support team.

The solution’s ability to reduce false positives and help us focus on the highest-risk threats is the tricky part because we are still doing the filtering. The things it sees are out of the ordinary and anomalous. In our company, we have a lot of anomalous behavior, so it's not the tool. Vectra is doing what it's supposed to do, but we need to figure out whether that anomalous behavior is normal for our company. 

The majority of the findings are misconfigurations of servers and applications. That's the majority of things that I'm investigating at the moment. These are not security risks, but need to be addressed. We have more of those than I expected, which is good, but not part of my job. While it's good that Vectra detects misconfiguratons, there are not our primary goal.

The solution is an eight (out of 10). 

We don't investigate our cloud at the moment.

We use it as our internal network monitoring solution.

It's interesting to consider how it has helped our organization because it's a security product. But the way it has helped is that nothing has gone wrong. And it has certainly enhanced our internal security capabilities.

Vectra has helped accelerate our threat investigations, providing us with real-time visibility of potential threats to the network that we can act upon or triage accordingly. Prior to the implementation of Vectra, we didn't have that visibility. We had a number of disparate security tools, each with its own alerting functionality. Vectra has significantly helped with a consolidated view of potential threats. And the prioritization of threats allows us to focus specifically on those threats that we believe present the greatest risk and to react to those threats extremely quickly.

Vectra MDR is also very important for us, given the relatively small size of our internal team, and it gives us 24/7 capability that we didn't have before we used Vectra's MDR service.

We particularly like the user experience around the dashboard, which we find to be much more straightforward than the dashboard of some of the competitive products. In the grand scheme of things, we're a relatively small organization with approximately 1,000 users and a small internal security team. Compared with some of its competitors, Vectra is a really easy system to understand and use to prioritize where we need to focus our security resources.

We use Microsoft 365 and Vectra extends our ability to track attacker activity, whether that happens on-premises, in a data center, or in a SaaS environment. It provides complete coverage and visibility across our ICT estate. That was a real positive when we were going through the selection process. The simplicity of the dashboard and the categorization of alerts as low, medium, high, or critical, presents us with the potential of a security risk. We can then choose to investigate it, regardless of whether it's an on-premises or cloud-security risk. They are presented in the single-pane-of-glass dashboard, and that allows us to take the appropriate action. The detection and prioritization of attacker behaviors are extremely important.

A blind spot that I have is around the ease with which you can automate threat intervention.

We've been using Vectra AI for approximately 12 months.

It seems to be extremely stable. We've not had any issues in that respect.

Vectra has visibility across our entire ICT network, which is a combination of on-premises and cloud environments. Our cloud solution is Azure, and it extends to about 1,000 users. The vast majority of them are now remote or mobile workers.

It has comfortably managed the needs of our organization and I don't have any concerns if we were to need, at some point in the future, to either scale or switch the current balance between on-prem and cloud.

We are very satisfied with the support. It has been excellent so far. It has been very timely, very personalized, and always quick to find solutions. We've been really pleased with it.

Positive

We didn't have a previous solution. We have no internal networking monitoring capability.

We started with a proof of concept and then we committed to the Vectra solution. That's when we began the formal implementation. From the very initial engagement to the proof concept and through the transition to service, it took approximately six months.

The deployment went very well and that was a real positive in terms of the engagement with the onboarding and the customer experience.

Across our ICT team, six individuals were involved in security, infrastructure, project management, and service transition.

There is no maintenance of the solution on our side.

The implementation was supported directly by Vectra UK itself.

The return on investment from the product comes from not incurring unplanned costs because of a security incident.

The upfront pricing model that we have would have been more beneficial if it had been a recurring license fee, but that wasn't a massive issue for us. It's fairly priced.

We evaluated other options very thoroughly. It became a two-horse race between Vectra and Darktrace. The differentiators for us were the UI experience, the MDR, and we felt that there was better engagement with the Vectra presales team. They better understood our needs and how Vectra would fit as a solution.

The percentage of critical alerts from Vectra that are critical or true positives, to be fair, is relatively small, probably about 10 percent, but that's more a reflection of the fact that we're still a relatively new client and that the system is still learning. What we have noticed though is that the triage process is effective and we don't get multiple false negatives once we've identified an issue.

We bought Vectra AI through our IT partner, which is CDW. They were only involved in the procurement process. We used a partner to ensure that we could demonstrate that we had done so according to compliance.

I would definitely recommend Vectra and to do a proof of concept. We learned quite a lot through that proof-of-concept process. Those lessons certainly helped us when we went into the implementation process and to engage internal ICT team stakeholders and anticipate central issues in the implementation process. A proof of concept would be invaluable for anybody thinking about implementing this or one of the competitive solutions.

At the moment, we're really pleased with the product and it's a really good fit for the size of our organization.

As a sector, the education industry as a whole is under threat with quite a large volume of immediate threat offenders. We've seen numerous attacks coming through brute force or DDoS. The amount of ransomware and phishing attacks is on the rise compared to that of five years ago, for instance. I see regular threat campaigns from numerous actors around the world.

Our main use case is to have Vectra AI as an addition to our security team. We have a large campus with 1,100 boarding students and about 600 staff on top of that. However, my security team only comprises myself and one other person.

Being able to detect security threats in real-time and, more importantly, being able to get rid of the noise is very important to me. That is, getting rid of the false positives and just focusing on the actual high threats that we see coming through is a great benefit for us.

The biggest feature for us, because we are heavy Microsoft users, is its integration with Office 365. On top of Vectra AI, we use all of the Microsoft security platforms, such as Defender ATP and Sentinel. Having full integration and a central platform to look at all of the threats that are coming through from the different platforms is a huge benefit for us.

With one nice front dashboard, we can look at the high-volume threats rather than all of the noise. We do get a lot of noise as our students all own their own devices. With Vectra AI, we can look at threats in a controlled manner, which saves us an extraordinary amount of time. Even if I doubled the manpower, I doubt that I would still have the same visibility that I have with the correct security platform.

Vectra AI's Threat Detection and Response platform has done remarkably well. We're well-versed in using the security dashboard from Microsoft Defender, and we're at the stage where we are checking both. We haven't fully switched to relying on only the Vectra dashboard yet.

In terms of Vectra AI Attack Signal Intelligence for empowering security analysts within our organization, we have complete faith in the data that's coming through from Vectra. If we could also have what's happening at the front-end, that is, the firewall, then it would give us the complete security front dashboard.

In education as a sector, we are looking at AI a lot in terms of how it can be used as part of the teaching and learning side of things. It would be great to have Vectra AI look at a better way to enhance the security posture related to the AI tools in our portfolio.

We've been using Vectra now for about eight months.

Vectra AI's stability has been 100%.

Vectra AI's integration team was spot-on. They helped us with a very well-defined and well-tested plan, and they worked with us to ensure that the product met all of our goals. Now that we're a customer, we have regular meet-ups with the team.

The technical support staff are very knowledgeable regardless of the type of questions we've had. It feels like they are more than just a support team. I feel like I can reach out to them whenever I need to because they're approachable and understand the challenges that we have within our industry. As such, I would give them a rating of ten out of ten.

Positive

Previously, we used Darktrace. Though it is a good platform, because there were so many false positives coming through, we found that we were neglecting it and not investigating the alerts. After less than a year of using Vectra, we've managed to tailor our dashboards to a point where we just see the high-volume or high-risk alerts coming through, and we act on those on an instant basis. Vectra AI has helped me get my time back. 

Vectra's pricing is too high. All schools will not be able to afford it. Vectra will only end up targeting higher education and higher value independence purely because of the price.

A lot of schools would love to have a product like Vectra AI, but they simply can't because they struggle to even pay the high E5 licensing from Microsoft. When you're up against that, Vectra AI is never going to be within the sector's price range.

We evaluated whether we wanted to switch to Vectra AI or whether we wanted to utilize just our existing Microsoft security stack.

Overall, I would rate Vectra AI an eight out of ten. I am basing my whole security portfolio and roadmap around Vectra, which means that in the future I need to get more automation, remove some of the cross-tracking that we do with the Microsoft security stack, and then become much more reliant on the data coming through from Vectra AI.

This tool operates on machine learning principles, utilizing its own AI-based models and rules to detect activity within your environment. Initially, Vectra AI observes and monitors your organization's behavior for a two-week period, identifying legitimate services operating within your environment. Once it completes this monitoring phase and detects all services, it begins to assign certainty and severity levels to the network traffic it observes.

Vectra AI offers a range of valuable features. Firstly, it utilizes its own AI-based tools. Secondly, it provides various dashboards that facilitate the identification of connections and can detect data exfiltration, meaning data sent from your environment to another. The tool operates based on metadata, offering comprehensive information about traffic between source and destination. Some key features include the ability to integrate with EDR or EPP solutions, allowing you to secure servers with stability issues or infections. Alternatively, you can use Active Directory to lock down infected hosts if you choose not to incorporate EPP or EDR. These features provide insights into your network, showing connection details, data transfers, VPN connections, and the number of connected EDS event hosts, among other things.             

One area where there's room for improvement is the absence of a comprehensive TCP recording and replay feature. While there is an alternative method available, it doesn't provide the same functionality in a graphical interface.

I have been using Vectra AI for the past 12 months. 

In terms of stability, I've been using it for the past month, and I haven't encountered any significant issues or downtime. Based on this one-month experience, I would rate its stability as a seven out of ten.

Scalability is excellent and I would rate it a 10 out of 10. Expanding the sensor capacity is relatively straightforward. However, it's crucial to plan for scalability during deployment. If an organization anticipates significant traffic, they should choose a brain that can handle it. Selecting a smaller brain initially and then attempting to expand later may lead to challenges. The scalability largely depends on the organization's needs and Vectra's ability to accommodate them.

From what I've heard, the support team is responsive and helpful. However, I haven't had the opportunity to directly interact with the technical support team.

Positive

The on-prem setup requirement is something easy. However, the cloud's environment setup is a bit tricky and complex. Not only because of the Vectra but also due to the some limitations of the cloud setup. The deployment process varies depending on the organization's size and footprint. It typically takes about one week for data centers with a dispersed network across different regions. For Vectra, on-premises deployment is relatively straightforward, but the cloud deployment can be more complex.

It's relatively on the pricier side, but when compared to other solutions. It's not the most budget-friendly option, but it can be considered somewhat more cost-effective in comparison to other alternatives.

I would rate it a seven.

I would advise other organizations using Vectra to ensure they fine-tune their service groups, correctly label their services, and integrate their firewalls and AWS systems. This will help obtain accurate and updated information about DMZ tools, VPN tools, and EC2 tools, allowing Vectra to have better visibility into the services running. This, in turn, can improve the accuracy of the scan feed and provide more precise results, reducing false positives.

Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

Negative

We use it to monitor what is happening on our network, especially to protect our network from malicious activity.

We also have the sensor into Office 365, so we can also monitor everything that is happening in there.

At the moment, we use it to monitor all our endpoints.

The solution's Privileged Account Analytics for detecting issues with privileged accounts is critical for our organization. Because of risk, we scan our entire network. We have a lot of segmented networks where clients can almost do nothing. If we just look into everything, then sometimes there is a bit of noise. When you select your privileged hosts or accounts, you can see how many things are left over and which are the most critical that need to be solved as soon as possible.

It notifies us if our Office 365 has been compromised. Even after business hours, I get personal emails. This is a temporary solution because we are working doing repetitive alerting, but that's a work in process. We are working on an integration with our authentication system that will be able to detect an account or device. We want to automate that process so the account will be locked out for a period of time.

Vectra is a detection system on top of our protection system. We do a lot of protection on our network, but that protection is a configuration based on human interaction, where there can also be human faults or errors in the system. 

The solution captures network metadata at scale and enriches it with security information, e.g., we have sensors for Symantec antivirus and our virtual infrastructure. We are looking into extra sensors for enabling some things from Microsoft Defender. We integrated it into our Active Directory so we can do some user correlations, etc. It enriches the metadata on hosts and accounts, but that is mainly informative. It is good for us when making a final decision about some detections.

It has helped us to organize our security. We get a better overview on what is happening on the network, which has helped us get quicker responses to users. If we see malicious activity, then we can quickly take action on it. Previously, we weren't getting an overview as fast as we are now, so we can now provide a quicker response.

The visibility is much greater because of the behavior analysis and details that sometimes we have to put into it. On the firewall that we already have, sometimes we do manual lookups and check if everything is okay, then do research into it. Now, we put less effort into trying to manually do things to ensure that we have a good security model. We can see more how behavior changes with time, but that also requires us to put more time into the solution.

The solution gives us a baseline for users and their behaviors. We are able to establish which users have risky behaviors, then reach out to them and recommend better ways of doing things.

The hosts are critical hosts, which are really good when used to look up things as fast as you can because these could be very risky situations. Furthermore, within detections, we try to clean up a lot of things that are low in priority. It is same thing for the accounts within Office 365: Everything that is critical has to be solved as fast as possible.

The triaging is very interesting because we can do more with less work. We have more visibility, without too many false positives. It is a work in process because there are a lot of clients in the network, and everything has to be researched to see if it is valid, but most alerts and detections are solved with a bit of triaging.

The interface is very intuitive and easy to use. It gives a good overview, and it is important to understand what is happening on the network.

The integration within our virtualization infrastructure allows us to see the traffic that is going between virtual machines, even within our host. That gives us a lot more insights.

The solution’s ability to reduce false positives and help you focus on the highest-risk threats is mostly good. It is still a bit of work in process, but I can give feedback to the company from the help desk. There is follow-up from the Vectra team who follows it closely. We can also give a lot of inputs to make it still a better product. It's already a very good product, but in comparison with a lot of systems I used in the past, the false positives are really a burden because they are taking a lot of time at this moment.

The Office 365 integration is still a pretty new feature. I also have seen some improvements, and they email us with every step in the improvement process. I think that this integration will grow.

Every area has room from improvement. Security is an ongoing process. It is important for Vectra to keep updating their system based on new behaviors.

We would like to see the combination of the cloud with on-premise, e.g., what's happening in the cloud versus what's happening in the on-premise situation. If there is a phishing mail in the cloud, then the phishing mail comes in and a colleague clicks on that mail. Normally, it would be blocked by the system. However, when it's not blocked, then there can be malware on the system locally. We think it's important to get the integration of what's happening on Office 365 with phishing mails. 

Sometimes, it is a bit noisy on the dashboard because all the systems are on one field. On the dashboard, we have a complete overview of high, medium, and low risks. However, it would be more interesting for us if they could split that dashboard into high, medium, and low devices. For example, there is a dashboard on a device with a complete overview specifically for high-risk.

It has been operational for a few months.

It runs very smoothly. It is stable.

We haven't had any issues in regards to the stability or performance. The interface works very quickly. There is no latency on the traffic.

It scales well. 

For end users, we have about 10,00. On the administrative side, there are five to 10 system admins who use the information from the system for configuration and monitoring tasks.

The technical support is very good with fast responses. They reach out if they see there might be more questions. So, if you have a simple question, it could be that they elevate it to a more complex question to see what you really mean.

Seeing all the malware reaching out to CMC services from within our network, we reach out to those people via the help desk, and tell them, "Maybe you can scan this or that because those systems are managed by us." We get a lot of thanks from those people, which are often saying, "I did have some strange behavior on our systems, but I didn't know what it was. I wasn't doing anything about it, but thank you. It helps when you scan it, and the system is running better at the moment." In a completely unmanaged network with a lot of devices bring your own devices), it helps everybody.

The way that we can work with support to add feature requests is very interesting because it is an evolving world.

We didn't have a solution like Vectra previously.

The initial setup was completely straightforward. I didn't need any help. They delivered the device within the first weeks of COVID-19. The system is preconfigured from Vectra. I placed it in the server home, configured the network, and moved the Internet traffic out of the mailboxes, then I put it onto network so it was visible. In 30 minutes to an hour, everything was running.

We can sleep better.

As long as there is no full cycle attack, we will earn our money back.

Efficiency increased. There is less technical work to be done to ensure that nothing is happening from threats. Now, the system gives us the transparency that we need.

The solution has reduced the time it takes us to respond to attacks. In the past, it was difficult to know if something was happening because we didn't have an overview. Now, we know it very quickly because we have an overview of what is happening.

The pricing is high. 

Darktrace was also pricey.

We also evaluated Darktrace. We made a decision to stop testing Darktrace very early on, so it is difficult to compare to Vectra.

We chose Vectra because of the solution's simplicity; it is more straightforward. Also, we liked Vectra's support, visibility, and implementation. The solution comes to a conclusion within Vectra about some detections. It was easier to find the technical details which were interesting without looking too deep. The correlation was good too. At the end of the proof of a concept, Vectra added some extra features. However, for finding the way into the system, it took us a lot more time. 

We found that Vectra enables us to answer investigative questions that other solutions are unable to address. They provide a checklist regarding what we can do about detections. Because of this visibility, we don't have to do more investigations. 

We have other systems, like Office 365, which do behavior analysis and some signature behavior analysis. However, Vectra does not gives that many false positives in comparison with other solutions. Also, we are now able to see the entire network and cloud.

If you are looking into this type of solution and have the money, then you certainly need to look into Vectra.

The campaigns are interesting when looking at the beginning of a campaign. The scope of false positives is a real issue in a network that continuously has a lot of new hosts, but we can cope with it. We have given some feedback to the help desk regarding coping with this matter.

We hope that we can keep it so we don't see a complete lifecycle of an attack.

We are planning to use more features of the solution in the future, e.g., automation. We also want to integrate it with more advanced client security features.

I would rate this solution as an eight of 10. There is still a lot of development going on with it.