SOAR and security automation services for security operations

Start with work that gathers information and changes nothing: alert enrichment, reputation and asset lookups, deduplication, ticket creation and evidence collection. These remove the most analyst time with the least risk. Actions that change state, such as isolating a host, disabling an account or blocking a sender, come later and run behind an approval step until their behavior is proven.

It depends on volume and on how many tools must be coordinated. Native automation in a SIEM or XDR handles simple enrichment and notification well. A SOAR platform earns its cost when playbooks span several products, need case management and need an audit trail. Scripts work for a small team but become hard to maintain and hard to audit. We design for the tools you already own first.

Each playbook is developed against recorded alerts, then run in a mode that logs what it would have done without doing it. Results are compared with analyst decisions on the same alerts. Only when the two agree consistently does the playbook act, and state-changing steps keep an approval gate and a documented way to reverse the action.

By comparing the same measures before and after: analyst time per alert type, time from alert to first decision, the share of alerts closed without human handling, and how often automated decisions are overturned on review. An automation that saves time but is often overturned is a liability, so overturn rate is tracked as closely as speed.

In most cases, yes. Playbooks are built on the APIs of the SIEM, EDR, identity and ticketing tools already in place, including Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk, Elastic and common service desk platforms. Where a managed SOC is also in scope, the same playbooks serve both teams. The Autonomous SOC Analyst is our own product work in this area.