Blog
/
Incident Response
/
June 25, 2024

Let the Dominos Fall! SOC and IR Metrics for ROI

Default blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog image
25
Jun 2024
Vendors are scrambling to compare MTTD metrics laid out in the latest MITRE Engenuity ATT&CK® Evaluations. But this analysis is reductive, ignoring the fact that in cybersecurity, there are far more metrics that matter.

One of the most enjoyable discussions (and debates) I engage in is the topic of Security Operations Center (SOC) and Incident Response (IR) metrics to measure and validate an organization’s Return on Investment (ROI). The debate part comes in when I hear vendor experts talking about “the only” SOC metrics that matter, and only list the two most well-known, while completely ignoring metrics that have a direct causal relationship.

In this blog, I will discuss what I believe are the SOC/IR metrics that matter, how each one has a direct impact on the others, and why organizations should ensure they are working towards the goal of why these metrics are measured in the first place: Reduction of Risk and Costs.

Reduction of Risk and Costs

Every security solution and process an organization puts in place should reduce the organization’s risk of a breach, exposure by an insider threat, or loss of productivity. How an organization realizes net benefits can be in several ways:

  • Improved efficiencies can result in SOC/IR staff focusing on other areas such as advanced threat hunting rather than churning through alerts on their security consoles. It may also help organizations dealing with the lack of skilled security staff by using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and automated processes.
  • A well-oiled SOC/IR team that has greatly reduced or even eliminated mundane tasks attracts, motivates, and retains talent resulting in reduced hiring and training costs.
  • The direct impact of a breach such as a ransomware attack can be devastating. According to the 2024 Data Breach Investigations Report by Verizon, MGM Resorts International reported the ALPHV ransomware cost the company approximately $100 million[1].
  • Failure to take appropriate steps to protect the organization can result in regulatory fines; and if an organization has, or is considering, purchasing Cyber Insurance, can result in declined coverage or increased premiums.

How does an organization demonstrate they are taking proactive measures to prevent breaches? That is where it's important to understand the nine (yes, nine) key metrics, and how each one directly influences the others, play their roles.

Metrics in the Incident Response Timeline

Let’s start with a review of the key steps in the Incident Response Timeline:

Seven of the nine key metrics are in the IR timeline, while two of the metrics occur before you ever have an incident. They occur in the Pre-Detection Stage.

‍Pre-Detection stage metrics are:

  • Preventions Per Intrusion Attempt (PPIA)
  • False Positive Reduction Rate (FPRR)

Next is the Detect and Investigate stage, there are three metrics to consider:

  • Mean Time to Detection (MTTD)
  • Mean Time to Triage (MTTT)
  • Mean Time to Understanding (MTTU)

This is followed by the Remediation stage, there are two metrics here:

  • Mean Time to Containment (MTTC)
  • Mean Time to Remediation / Recovery (MTTR)

Finally, there is the Risk Reduction stage, there are two metrics:

  • Mean Time to Advice (MTTA)
  • Mean Time to Implementation (MTTI)

Pre-Detection Stage

Preventions Per Intrusion Attempt

PPIA is defined as stopping any intrusion attempt at the earliest possible stage. Your network Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) blocks vulnerability exploits, your e-mail security solution intercepts and removes messages with malicious attachments or links, your egress firewall blocks unauthorized login attempts, etc. The adversary doesn’t get beyond Step 1 in the attack life cycle.

This metric is the first domino. Every organization should strive to improve on this metric every day. Why? For every intrusion attempt you stop right out of the gate, you eliminate the actions for every other metric. There is no incident to detect, triage, investigate, remediate, or analyze post-incident for ways to improve your security posture.

When I think about PPIA, I always remember back to a discussion with a former mentor, Tim Crothers, who discussed the benefits of focusing on Prevention Failure Detection.

The concept is that as you layer your security defenses, your PPIA moves ever closer to 100% (no one has ever reached 100%). This narrows the field of fire for adversaries to breach into your organization. This is where novel, unknown, and permuted threats live and breathe. This is where solutions utilizing Unsupervised Machine Learning excel in raising anomalous alerts – indications of potential compromise involving one of these threats. Unsupervised ML also raises alerts on anomalous activity generated by known threats and can raise detections before many signature-based solutions. Most organizations struggle to find strong permutations of known threats, insider threats, supply chain attacks, attacks utilizing n-day and 0-day exploits. Moving PPIA ever closer to 100% also frees your team up for conducting threat hunting activities – utilizing components of your SOC that collect and store telemetry to query for potential compromises based on hypothesis the team raises. It also significantly reduces the alerts your team must triage and investigate – solving many of the issues outlined at the start of this paper.

False Positive Reduction Rate

Before we discuss FPRR, I should clarify how I define False Positives (FPs). Many define FPs as an alert that is in error (i.e.: your EDR alerts on malware that turns out to be AV signature files). While that is a FP, I extend the definition to include any alert that did not require triage / investigation and distracts the SOC/IR team (meaning they conducted some level of triage / investigation).

This metric is the second domino. Why is this metric important? Every alert your team exerts time and effort on that is a non-issue distracts them from alerts that matter. One of the major issues that has resonated in the security industry for decades is that SOCs are inundated with alerts and cannot clear the backlog. When it comes to PPIA + FPRR, I have seen analysts spend time investigating alerts that were blocked out of the gate while their screen continued to fill up with more. You must focus on Prevention Failure Detection to get ahead of the backlog.

Detect and Investigate Stages

Mean Time to Detection

MTTD, or “Dwell Time”, has decreased dramatically over the past 12 years. From well over a year to 16 days in 2023[2]. MTTD is measured from the earliest possible point you could detect the intrusion to the moment you actually detect it.

This third domino is important because the longer an adversary remains undetected, the more the odds increase they will complete their mission objective. It also makes the tasks of triage and investigation more difficult as analysts must piece together more activity and adversaries may be erasing evidence along the way – or your storage retention does not cover the breach timeline.

Many solutions focusing solely on MTTD can actually create the very problem SOCs are looking to solve.  That is, they generate so much alerting that they flood the console, email, or text messaging app causing an unmanageable queue of alerts (this is the problem XDR solutions were designed to resolve by focusing on incidents rather than alerts).

Mean Time to Triage

MTTT involves SOCs that utilize Level 1 (aka Triage) analysts to render an “escalate / do not escalate” alert verdict accurately. Accuracy is important because Triage Analysts typically are staff new to cyber security (recent grad / certification) and may over escalate (afraid to miss something important) or under escalate (not recognize signs of a successful breach). Because of this, a small MTTT does not always equate to successful handling of incidents.

This metric is important because keeping your senior staff focused on progressing incidents in a timely manner (and not expending time on false positives) should reduce stress and required headcount.

Mean Time to Understanding

MTTU deals with understanding the complete nature of the incident being investigated. This is different than MTTT which only deals with whether the issue merits escalation to senior analysts. It is then up to the senior analysts to determine the scope of the incident, and if you are a follower of my UPSET Investigation Framework, you know understanding the full scope involves:

U = All compromised accounts

P = Persistence Mechanisms used

S = All systems involved (organization, adversary, and intermediaries)

E = Endgame (or mission objective)

T = Techniques, Tactics, Procedures (TTPs) utilized by the adversary

MTTU is important because this information is critical before any containment or remediation actions are taken. Leave a stone unturned, and you alert the adversary that you are onto them and possibly fail to close an avenue of access.

Remediation Stages

Mean Time to Containment

MTTC deals with neutralizing the threat. You may not have kicked the adversary out, but you have halted their progress to their mission objective and ability to inflict further damage. This may be through use of isolation capabilities, termination of malicious processes, or firewall blocks.

MTTC is important, especially with ransomware attacks where every second counts. Faster containment responses can result in reduced / eliminated disruption to business operations or loss of data.

Mean Time to Remediation / Recovery

The full scope of the incident is understood, the adversary has been halted in their tracks, no malicious processes are running on any systems in your organization. Now is the time to put things back to right. MTTR deals with the time involved in restoring business operations to pre-incident stage. It means all remnants of changes made by the adversary (persistence, account alterations, programs installed, etc.) are removed; all disrupted systems are restored to operations (i.e.: ransomware encrypted systems are recovered from backups / snapshots), compromised user accounts are reset, etc.

MTTR is important because it informs senior management of how fast the organization can recover from an incident. Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity plans play a major role in improving this score.

Risk Reduction Stages

Mean Time to Advice

After the dust has settled from the incident, the job is not done. MTTA deals with identifying and assessing the specific areas (vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, lack of security controls) that permitted the adversary to advance to the point where detection occurred (and any actions beyond). The SOC and IR teams should then compile a list of recommendations to present to management to improve the security posture of the organization so the same attack path cannot be used.

Mean Time to Implement

Once recommendations are delivered to management, how long does it take to implement them? MTTI tracks this timeline because none of it matters if you don’t fix the holes that led to the breach.

Nine Dominos

There are the nine dominos of SOC / IR metrics I recommend helping organizations know if they are on the right track to reduce risk, costs and improve morale / retention of the security teams. You may not wish to track all nine, but understanding how each metric impacts the others can provide visibility into why you are not seeing expected improvements when you implement a new security solution or change processes.

Improving prevention and reducing false positives can make huge positive impacts on your incident response timeline. Utilizing solutions that get you to resolution quicker allows the team to focus on recommendations and risk reduction strategies.

Whichever metrics you choose to track, just be sure the dominos fall in your favor.

‍

References

[1] 2024 Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report, p83

[2] Mandiant M-Trends 2023

‍

‍

‍

Inside the SOC
Darktrace cyber analysts are world-class experts in threat intelligence, threat hunting and incident response, and provide 24/7 SOC support to thousands of Darktrace customers around the globe. Inside the SOC is exclusively authored by these experts, providing analysis of cyber incidents and threat trends, based on real-world experience in the field.
Author
John Bradshaw
Sr. Director, Technical Marketing

John Bradshaw is Sr. Director, Technical Marketing at Darktrace. He is a security practitioner at heart having built a Customer Security/SOC operations team for (then) the largest ISP on the planet. In his vendor roles he has worked with various security solutions utilized by SOC / IR teams and conducted advanced incident investigation workshops to help organizations understand the benefits and limitations of the solutions they are using. He holds a Bachelor of Business Administration from Averett University and a Master of Science in Network Security from Capitol College.

Watch the NIS2 Webinar
Book a 1-1 meeting with one of our experts
Get in touch
Share this article
Trending blogs
1
Our Annual Survey Reveals How Security Teams Are Adapting to AI-Powered Threats
Mar 4, 2025
2
Darktrace Releases Annual 2024 Threat Insights
Feb 19, 2025
3
From Hype to Reality: How AI is Transforming Cybersecurity Practices
Feb 10, 2025
4
From Containment to Remediation: Darktrace / CLOUD & Cado Reducing MTTR
Mar 6, 2025
5
RansomHub Ransomware: Darktrace’s Investigation of the Newest Tool in ShadowSyndicate's Arsenal
Jan 14, 2025

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

/

Network

/

March 21, 2025

Cyberhaven Supply Chain Attack: Exploiting Browser Extensions

Default blog imageDefault blog image

The evolution of supply chain attacks

Supply chain attacks are becoming increasingly sophisticated. As network defenses improve, threat actors continuously adapt and refine their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) to achieve their goals. In recent years, this has led to a rise in the exploitation of trusted services and software, including legitimate browser extensions. Exploitation of these extensions can provide adversaries with a stealthy means to infiltrate target networks and access high-value accounts undetected.

A notable example of this trend was the compromise of the Cyberhaven Chrome extension at the end of 2024. This incident appeared to be part of a broader campaign targeting multiple Chrome browser extensions, highlighting the evolving nature of supply chain attacks [1].

What is Cyberhaven?

Cyberhaven, a US-based data security organization, experienced a security breach on December 24, 2024, when a phishing attack reportedly compromised one of their employee's credentials [2]. This allowed attackers to publish a malicious version of the Cyberhaven Chrome extension, which exfiltrated cookies and authenticated sessions from targeted websites. The malicious extension was active from December 25 to December 26 – a time when most businesses and employees were out of office and enjoying the festive period, a fact not lost on threat actors. The attackers, likely a well-organized and financially motivated group, compromised more than 30 additional Chrome extensions, affecting more than 2.6 million users [3]. They used sophisticated phishing techniques to authorize malicious OAuth applications, bypassing traditional security measures and exploiting vulnerabilities in OAuth authorizations. The primary motive appeared to be financial gain, targeting high-value platforms like social media advertising and AI services [4].

In late December 2024, multiple Darktrace customers were compromised via the Cyberhaven Chrome extension; this blog will primarily focus on Darktrace / NETWORK detections from one affected customer.

Darktrace’s coverage of Cyberhaven compromises

On December 26, 2024, Darktrace identified a series of suspicious activities across multiple customer environments, uncovering a structured attack sequence that progressed from initial intrusion to privilege escalation and data exfiltration. The attack was distributed through a malicious update to the Cyberhaven Chrome extension [2]. The malicious update established a foothold in customer environments almost immediately, leading to further anomalies.

As with other Chrome browser extensions, Cyberhaven Chrome extensions were updated automatically with no user interaction required. However, in this instance, the automatic update included a malicious version which was deployed to customer environments. This almost immediately introduced unauthorized activity, allowing attackers to establish a foothold in customer networks. The update allowed attackers to execute their objectives in the background, undetected by traditional security tools that rely on known indicators of compromise (IoCS) rather than identifying anomalies.

While multiple customer devices were seen connecting to cyberhaven[.]io, a legitimate Cyberhaven domain, Darktrace detected persistent beaconing behavior to cyberhavenext[.]pro, which appeared to be attempting to masquerade as another legitimate Cyberhaven domain. Darktrace recognized this activity as unusual, triggering several model alerts in Darktrace / NETWORK to highlight the persistent outbound connections to the suspicious domain.

Further analysis of external connectivity patterns indicated  an increase in anomalous HTTP requests alongside this beaconing activity. Multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) sources also suggest that the cyberhavenext[.]pro endpoint is associated with malicious activities [5].

Darktrace / NETWORK’s detection of beaconing activity to cyberhavenext[.]pro
Figure 1: Darktrace / NETWORK’s detection of beaconing activity to cyberhavenext[.]pro

Analysis using Darktrace’s Advanced Search revealed that some of these connections were directed to the suspicious external IP address 149.28.124[.]84. Further investigation confirmed that the IP correlated with two SSL hostnames, including the malicious cyberhavenext[.]pro, further reinforcing its connection to the attack infrastructure.

Darktrace Advanced Search analysis showing the IP address 149.28.124[.]84 correlating to two SSL hostnames, one of which is cyberhavenext[.]pro.
Figure 2: Darktrace Advanced Search analysis showing the IP address 149.28.124[.]84 correlating to two SSL hostnames, one of which is cyberhavenext[.]pro.

Between December 23 and December 27, Darktrace observed sustained beaconing-like activity from affected devices on the customer’s network.

Darktrace’s detection of beaconing activities from a customer device to the endpoint 149.28.124[.]84 between December 23 and December 27.
Figure 3: Darktrace’s detection of beaconing activities from a customer device to the endpoint 149.28.124[.]84 between December 23 and December 27.

Darktrace observed 27 unique devices connecting to the malicious command-and-control (C2) infrastructure as far back as December 3. While most connections were brief, they represented an entry point for malicious activity. Over a two-day period, two devices transmitted 5.57 GiB of incoming data and 859.37 MiB of outgoing data, generating over 3 million log events across SSL, HTTP, and connection data.

Subsequent analysis identified a significant increase in unauthorized data transfers to the aforementioned 149.28.124[.]84 IP on another customer network, highlighting the potential broader impact of this compromise. The volume and frequency of these transfers suggested that attackers were leveraging automated data collection techniques, further underscoring the sophistication of the attack.

Darktrace’s detection of the likely exfiltration of 859.37 MiB to the endpoint 149.28.124[.]84.
Figure 4: Darktrace’s detection of the likely exfiltration of 859.37 MiB to the endpoint 149.28.124[.]84.

External research suggested that once active, the Cyberhaven extension would begin silently collecting session cookies and authentication tokens, specifically targeting high-value accounts such as Facebook Ads accounts [4]. Darktrace’s analysis of another affected customer noted many HTTP POST connections directed to a specific URI ("ai-cyberhaven"), while GET requests contained varying URIs prefixed with "/php/urlblock?args=AAAh....--redirect." This activity indicated an exfiltration mechanism, consistent with techniques observed in other compromised Chrome extensions. By compromising session cookies, attackers could potentially gain administrative access to connected accounts, further escalating their privileges [4].

Conclusion

This incident highlights the importance of monitoring not just endpoint security, but also cloud and browser-based security solutions, as attackers increasingly target these trusted and oft overlooked vectors.

Ultimately, by focusing on anomaly detection and behavioral analysis rather than static signatures and lists of ‘known bads’, Darktrace was able to successfully detect devices affected by the Cyberhaven Chrome browser extension compromise, by identifying activity that would likely have been considered legitimate and benign by traditional security solutions.

This compromise also serves as a reminder that supply chain attacks are not limited to traditional software vendors. Browser extensions, cloud-based applications, and SaaS services are equally vulnerable, as evidenced by Darktrace's detection of Balada Injector malware exploiting WordPress vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized network access [6]. Therefore, increased targeting of browser-based security tools, and a greater exploitation of OAuth and session hijacking techniques are to be expected. Attackers will undoubtedly refine their methods to infiltrate legitimate vendors and distribute malicious updates through trusted channels. By staying informed, vigilant, and proactive, organizations can mitigate exposure to evolving supply chain threats and safeguard their critical assets from emerging browser-based attack techniques.

Credit to Rajendra Rushanth (Cyber Analyst) Justin Torres (Senior Cyber Analyst) and Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

Darktrace Model Detections

·       Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Beacon for 4 Days (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to Rare Destination (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Device / Suspicious Domain (AP: C2 Comms, AP: Tooling)

·       Compromise / Sustained TCP Beaconing Activity To Rare Endpoint (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Connection / Multiple Failed Connections to Rare Endpoint (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Server Activity / Anomalous External Activity from Critical Network Device (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Repeating Connections Over 4 Days (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Connection / Multiple HTTP POSTs to Rare Hostname (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Server Activity / Outgoing from Server (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Email Nexus / Connection to Hijacked Correspondent Link

·       Compromise / Suspicious TLS Beaconing To Rare External (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Quick and Regular Windows HTTP Beaconing (AP: C2 Comms)

List of IoCs

IoC - Type - Description + Confidence

cyberhavenext[.]pro - Hostname - Used for C2 communications and data exfiltration (cookies and session tokens)

149.28.124[.]84 - IP - Associated with malicious infrastructure

45.76.225[.]148 - IP - Associated with malicious infrastructure

136.244.115[.]219 - IP - Associated with malicious infrastructure

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Tactic – Technique – Sub-Technique

INITIAL ACCESS - T1176 - Browser Extensions

EXECUTION - T1204.002 - Malicious Browser Extensions

PERSISTENCE - T1176 - Browser Extensions

COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1071.001 - Web Protocols

COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1001 - Data Obfuscation

CREDENTIAL ACCESS - T1539 - Steal Web Session Cookie

DISCOVERY - T1518.001 - Security Software Discovery

LATERAL MOVEMENT - T1557.003 - Man-in-the-Browser

EXFILTRATION - T1041 - Exfiltration Over C2 Channel

EXFILTRATION - T1567.002 - Exfiltration to Cloud Storage

IMPACT - T1583.006 - Session Hijacking

References

[1] https://thehackernews.com/2024/12/16-chrome-extensions-hacked-exposing.html

[2] https://www.cyberhaven.com/blog/cyberhavens-chrome-extension-security-incident-and-what-were-doing-about-it

[3] https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/chrome-browser-extensions-hijacked/

[4] https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/28/24330758/chrome-extension-cyberhaven-hijack-phishing-cyberattack-facebook-ads-authentication-theft

[5] https://www.virustotal.com/gui/domain/cyberhavenext.pro

[6] https://darktrace.com/blog/balada-injector-darktraces-investigation-into-the-malware-exploiting-wordpress-vulnerabilities

Continue reading
About the author
Rajendra Rushanth
Cyber Analyst

Blog

/

Email

/

March 19, 2025

Global Technology Provider Transforms Email Threat Detection with Darktrace

Default blog imageDefault blog image

At a glance

  • Within just one month of using Darktrace / EMAIL, the volume of suspicious emails requiring analyst attention dropped by 75%, saving analysts 45 hours per month on analysis and investigation.
  • By offloading most manual, repetitive tasks to Darktrace / EMAIL, the company’s skilled security analysts can focus on developing new capabilities and tackling more complex, rewarding projects.
  • Darktrace recently detected and blocked a highly sophisticated and personalized phishing email that spoofed a Microsoft SharePoint and Teams website and used advanced engineering to impersonate the school of an employee’s family member.
  • The transition from the incumbent solution to Darktrace / EMAIL was seamless and undetectable to the company’s vast of customers and partners, reinforcing the security organization’s role as a business enabler—protecting the company and reducing risk without adding friction.

Securing a complex, distributed business without disruption

The company remains at the forefront of technological innovation and transformation; however, its success and ambitions come with the challenges of managing a distributed global business—balancing digital advancements, existing technology investments, and evolving compliance requirements.

Optimizing a complex tech stack for scalable growth

The organization operates a diverse technology stack spanning Windows, Mac, Linux, and multiple cloud environments, creating a complex and challenging IT landscape. The company’s Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) emphasizes the need for efficiency and agility. “Our goal is to scale and deliver new capabilities without increasing headcount, ensuring that costs remain proportionate to growth.”

Balancing security, governance, and business agility

Committed to responsible practices, this industry leader prioritizes secure and trustworthy technology for its customers who rely on its solutions. “Balancing business agility with governance is a constant challenge," said the CISO. "There’s always a natural push and pull, which I believe is healthy—but achieving the right balance is delicate.”

Protecting critical workflows without impacting productivity

For the organization, email is much more than just a communication tool. “Email plays a critical role in our engineering workflows and is fundamental to how we build our products.” Because of this, the company is extremely cautious about implementing any solution that could introduce friction or disrupt productivity. “There is zero tolerance for disruption, which is why we take a deliberate and methodical approach when evaluating, selecting, and deploying our tools and solutions,” he said.  

More than a vendor: A security partner invested in success

To ensure an optimal security infrastructure, the enterprise security team regularly evaluates market technologies to their existing solutions. With the rapidly evolving threat landscape, the CISO said they “wanted to validate whether we still had best-in-class protection and the right controls in place to secure our organization. It was about assessing whether we could do better in our ongoing effort to fine-tuning our approach to achieve the best possible outcome.”

The team evaluated 15 different email security vendors based on the following criteria:

  1. Efficacy to detect threats
  2. Ability to integrate with existing tooling
  3. Ease of use
  4. A vendor’s approach to partnership  

They initially narrowed the list to five vendors, conducting demo sessions for deeper evaluations before selecting three finalists for a proof of value (POV). “We analyzed actual malicious emails with each vendor to assess the accuracy of their detections, allowing for an objective comparison,” said the CISO. Through this rigorous process, the Darktrace / EMAIL security solution emerged as the best fit for their business. “Darktrace’s product performed well and showed a genuine commitment to partnering with us in the long-term to ensure our success.”

The team objectively understood where there were gaps across the different vendors, where they were strong, and where they could use improvement. “Based on the analysis, we knew that Darktrace / EMAIL could deliver as the data supported it, in our specific use cases.  

Partnership, integrity and respect

Throughout the evaluation process, the importance of partnership and mutual respect remained an essential factor to the CISO. “I wanted a company we could develop a long-term strategic partnership with, one that could extend far deeper than just email.” A key factor in choosing Darktrace was the commitment and engagement of its team at every level of the organization. “Darktrace showed integrity, patience and a genuine investment in building a strong relationship with my team.  That's why we're here today.”

“Together, we've delivered some fantastic outcomes”

For the organization, Darktrace / EMAIL has played a crucial role in reducing risk, empowering analysts, and enabling a lean, effective security strategy. “Together, we've delivered some fantastic outcomes,” said the CISO.  

Reducing risk. Empowering analysts

“Within that first month, we saw a 75% drop in suspicious emails that that required manual review, which reduced the time my team spent analyzing and investigating by 45 hours per month,” said the CISO. The security team values Darktrace / EMAIL not only for its ease of use but also for the time it frees up for more meaningful work. “Giving my team the opportunity to tackle complex challenges they enjoy and find more stimulating is important to me.” As they continue to fine-tune and optimize balance levels within Darktrace / EMAIL, he expects even greater efficiency gains in the coming months.

Maximizing protection while staying lean

It’s important for the security group to be proportionate with their spending, said the CISO. “It's all about what is enough security to enable the business. And that means, as our organization grows, it's important that we are as lean and as efficient as possible to deliver the best outcomes for the business.”  Embracing an AI-powered automated approach is an essential component to achieving that goal. By offloading most manual, repetitive tasks to Darktrace / EMAIL, the company’s skilled security analysts can focus on more strategic and proactive initiatives that enable the business.  

Protecting employees from advanced social engineering threats

Recently, Darktrace detected a malicious email targeting an employee, disguised as a spoofed Microsoft SharePoint and Teams website. What made this attack particularly sophisticated was its personalization — it impersonated the school where the employee’s family member attended. Unlike mass malicious emails sent to thousands of people, this was a highly targeted attack, leveraging advanced social engineering tactics to exploit connections within the education system and between family members.  

Protecting without disrupting

A seamless migration is often overlooked but is critical to success for any organization, said the CISO. With a wide ecosystem of partners, email is a highly visible, business-critical function for the organization — "any friction or downtime would have an immediate impact and could throttle the entire business,” he said. However, the transition from their previous solution to Darktrace / EMAIL was exceptionally smooth. “No one realized we changed providers because there was no disruption — no incidents at all. I cannot emphasize just how important that is when I'm trying to position our security organization as an enabling function for the business that protects and reduces risk without adding friction.”

A security partnership for the future

“To survive as a business over the next few years, adopting AI is no longer optional—it’s essential,” said the CISO. However, with the cybersecurity market becoming increasingly saturated, selecting the right solutions and vendors can be overwhelming. He stresses the importance of choosing strategic partners who not only deliver the outcomes you need, but also deeply understand your organization’s unique environment. “You’re only as strong as your partners. Technology innovation and the cybersecurity market are always changing.  At some point every solution will face a challenge—it’s inevitable. The differentiator will be how people respond when that happens.”  

Continue reading
About the author
The Darktrace Community
Your data. Our AI.
Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI