We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story
DD
Senior Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
MSP
A ready-made service that reports security threats and vulnerabilities

Pros and Cons

  • "This is a platform as a service provided by Azure. We don't need to install or maintain Azure Security Center. It is a ready-made service available in Azure. This is one of the main things that we like. If you look at similar tools, we have to install, maintain, and update services. Whereas, Azure Security Center manages what we are using. This is a good feature that has helped us a lot."
  • "One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view."

What is our primary use case?

We are working for a major client in the UK. So, we are moving all the products of clients from their on-premises environment to the cloud. One of the biggest challenges we face, “Once the infrastructure is created in the cloud, how can we make sure that the infrastructure is secure enough?” For that purpose, we are using Azure Security Center, which gives us all the security loopholes and vulnerabilities for our infrastructure. That has been helpful for us.

How has it helped my organization?

We use the Azure Security Center to scan the entire infrastructure from a security point of view. It gives us all the vulnerabilities, observations, etc. It reports most of the critical issues.

From an organization or security audit point of view, there are few tools available in the market. The output or score of Azure Security Center has really helped the organization from a business point of view by showing that we are secure enough with all our data, networks, or infrastructure in Azure. This helps the organization from a business point of view to promote the score, e.g., we are secure enough because this is our score in Azure Security Center.

We are using it from a security point of view. If there is a threat or vulnerability, the solution will immediately scan, report, or alert us to those issues.

What is most valuable?

We are using most of the good services in Azure:

  • The load balancing options
  • Firewall
  • Application Gateway
  • Azure AD. 

I value Azure Security Center the most from a security point of view. Everybody is concerned about moving data or infrastructure to the cloud. This solution proves that we are secure enough for that infrastructure, which is why I really value the Azure Security Center. We are secure in our infrastructure.

This is a platform as a service provided by Azure. We don't need to install or maintain Azure Security Center. It is a ready-made service available in Azure. This is one of the main things that we like. If you look at similar tools, we have to install, maintain, and update services. Whereas, Azure Security Center manages what we are using. This is a good feature that has helped us a lot.

What needs improvement?

From a business point of view, the only drawback is that Azure or Microsoft need to come up with flexible pricing/licensing. Then, I would rate it 10 out of 10.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using it in production for the last three years. I have been part of the cloud migration team for Azure Cloud for the last two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We started using Azure Cloud from the initial version. Every week or month, there are updates in Azure. For the last three years, we have been using the latest version.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Whenever we increase the number of our resources, Azure Security Center easily copes with it. Since this is a ready-made service, it will automatically scale.

We are working with around 100 to 150 major clients in the UK. Each client has 200 to 500 users.

From an overall infrastructure point of view, we have a five member team.

How are customer service and technical support?

We are getting adequate support and documentation from Microsoft. We are a Premium customer of Microsoft, so we are getting support in terms of documentation and manual support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using this service from the onset.

How was the initial setup?

This is a PaaS service. It is a ready-made service available in Azure Cloud. It is very easy to use and set up because you are using the platform. We don't want to maintain this service from our end. 

There are different models when it comes to the cloud:

  • Infrastructure as a service
  • Platform as a service
  • Software as a service.

We are using sort of a hybrid, both infrastructure as a service and platform as a service. 

What about the implementation team?

We are using our own team for the deployment.

We consume or subscribe to the service. Azure takes care of the maintenance and deployment, and we don't need to worry about it.

What was our ROI?

We are securing our customers' infrastructure using Azure Security Center. That internally helps their overall organization meet their goal/score on security.

So far, the feedback from the customer and our team have been really positive. We are very happy and getting return on investment from this product.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Its pricing is a little bit high in terms of Azure Security Center, but the good thing is that we don't need to maintain and deploy it. So, while the pricing is high, it is native to Azure which is why we prefer using this tool.

One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Other than Azure Security Center, we did not find a single tool which could analyze all our infrastructure or resources in Azure Cloud.

We were mainly looking for products or tools native to Azure. The other tools that we evaluated were not native to Azure. Azure Security Center is natively attached to Azure. Because other tools were not natively supporting Azure, then we would have to maintain and deploy them separately.

What other advice do I have?

So far, we have received very positive feedback from the team and customers. Because it is a single tool where we list all the problems or vulnerabilities, we are happy as a team. The customer is also happy.

End users are not interacting with Azure Security Center. This is a back-end service that evaluates security.

There are no other good tools in Azure, other than Azure Security Center, which will evaluate and alert you to security vulnerabilities and threats. So, if somebody is really concerned about the security of their infrastructure in Azure, I suggest you use Azure Security Center. The features that it provides from a security point of view are amazing.

I would rate the product as a seven or eight (out of 10) because it is really helping us to improve our security standards.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate
Bharani NVN
Senior Project Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Good log analytics and helpful alerting, but updates should be more readily released

Pros and Cons

  • "We can create alerts that trigger if there is any malicious activity happening in the workflow and these alerts can be retrieved using the query language."
  • "Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender."

What is our primary use case?

I am from a Citrix background and in our organization, we implement solutions and provide them to end-users. In our past couple of deployments, we have been using hybrid cloud scenarios where the complete workload is on the Azure platform and the management is done on the Citrix cloud.

The workloads include tasks for Windows 7, Windows 8, and Windows 10 devices, and they are all running on Azure. We have to make sure that they are compliant with our organization's security standards, which is why we are using the Azure Security Center.

We integrate each workload with the Azure Security Center, where we can use things like Azure Defender and use the Azure Log Analytics Workspace.

Our environment is completely virtual. We have a virtual desktop infrastructure, like a Desktop as a Service.

How has it helped my organization?

Azure Security Center has helped to improve our security posture. Before we implemented it, we used to have to install the agent manually for each and every workload. For example, if I have 40 machines in my environment, I have to go to all of them and install the agent. This manual process not only required a lot of human effort but created more opportunities for error. By using the Azure Security Center, I can integrate it just by selecting the subscription. It will take care of everything.

This solution has improved our end-user experience in cases, for example, where Microsoft Defender is not implemented, Azure Defender can be integrated. When an end-user runs an EXE file or any malicious activities are running on the device, Azure Security Center will capture them and send an alert to the administrator.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features related to my involvement are Azure Defender and enabling log analytics on the workloads. This helps to integrate the workload suite with the analytics repository. For example, if I want to capture any logs from a Windows 10 workload, then this allows me to do so.

The Log Analytics Workspace acts as a repository where it captures all of the data from Windows 10 and Windows 8 workloads. In order to implement it, an agent needs to be installed. With Azure Security Center, we can configure a policy that accounts for different subscription levels. It automatically installs the agent and begins capturing data.

This product provides us with many features including auto-provisioning of dependency agents for Azure Log Analytics, as well as for Azure Defender.

We can create alerts that trigger if there is any malicious activity happening in the workflow and these alerts can be retrieved using the query language.

What needs improvement?

Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender. It has most of the features for monitoring end-user machines for security updates or malicious activity but, for example, the latest DAT files are slow to arrive compared to Microsoft Defender.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I would rate the stability a four out of five. Once we enable it, the Azure Security Center will push security updates to all of the end-user machines and start capturing the logs. It helps in many ways.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There is no limitation to the scalability. For example, if I have 10 subscriptions in my Azure environment, it is my choice if I have to use five in production and five for non-production. If I require more, I can upgrade it as needed. It's very flexible.

The people who work with this product hands-on are our administrators. Apart from them, nobody has the access required to make changes.

How are customer service and technical support?

If we face any issue with Azure Security Center, where we are unable to solve it ourselves, we raise a support ticket with Microsoft directly. We describe the issue and they will come back to us with support.

Usually, we are happy with the support that we receive.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Prior to this product, we worked on a solution from McAfee. However, it was a legacy application and when it came time to upgrade, we opted to use one from Azure because we were using Azure already.

In the case of an on-premises workload, we instead use a SQUAM solution by Microsoft.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is a straightforward process. We just need to go into the security center and select the substrates. The deployment takes less than one hour to complete.

In terms of an implementation strategy, we simply follow the Microsoft documentation.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions. 

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anyone who is considering Azure Security Center is that it has similar features to the on-premises Microsoft Defender, as well as other software security tools. If you are already using an Azure environment then I recommend implementing Azure Security Center versus having security solutions from different vendors.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
Learn what your peers think about Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
554,586 professionals have used our research since 2012.
OB
Security Consulting, Manager at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
Top 5Leaderboard
Feature-rich, constantly updated, and integrates with Logic Apps for automated incident response

Pros and Cons

  • "The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
  • "There is no perfect product in the world and there are always features that can be added."

What is our primary use case?

This solution replaces, in many ways, the on-premises operations manager that used to be part of the System Center.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature of this solution is the support for a multi-cloud environment.

The policy-related features are good. For example, there is a compliance policy that is related to PCI and another related to NIST.

The support for dynamic networking is good.

Alerting and incident management are valuable features.

The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents. It is also integrated with Microsoft Defender.

They added new functionality into the pretty long list of features and it is constantly being updated. 

What needs improvement?

There is no perfect product in the world and there are always features that can be added. Innovation is something that is always on the table.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Azure Security Center for more than four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This product is much more stable than anything else. The SLA has four nines of stability and it is impossible to compare it with anything that is on-premises. Cloud systems are much more stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is not something that we talk about because this product only exists in the cloud. We talk about it in terms of regions. There are approximately 50 zones across the globe, where for example, Canada has three zones that are split into Central, East, and West.

This is an example of Software as a Service, so scalability is out of the question.

How are customer service and technical support?

If you need tech support, you need to go to the support site, find the proper program, and subscribe to it. Only basic support is included. If you need premium support or if you need a developer, the support is available, you just need to go to the site and find it.

It is extremely easy to subscribe, and extremely easy to understand. It depends on your requirements and on exactly what you need but a description of every program is readily available.

If you have questions, go to the FAQ, and on the same page, you will have access to the documentation. The documentation is crystal clear. It's very practical and actionable. It explains in simple phrases, or words, what the action is, what the purpose is, and what the benefit or value of it is. 

There is no need to find anything else. You start from the price calculator, and then click and get more information, and from the same page, you find what you need. 

You don't need to do anything else.

How was the initial setup?

With respect to implementation, you just switch it on.

If you need to deploy something else then there are step-by-step instructions available. Setup and deployment will be easy for those who have experience working with this type of solution.

For those not used to this type of operation or not working in this area, it is absolutely possible to talk to their partners, such as the one that I work for, and they will help you.

What about the implementation team?

If you hire the consulting service from a partner then they will help you to plan and design, including performing a capacity review to see what is required and what services need to be integrated. You will identify needs such as an on-premises data center versus using a third-party cloud.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

This is a worldwide service and depending on the country, there will be different prices. 

There is a price calculator for Azure Services. You select the service that you are interested in, and the basic or the standard is there immediately, which has support options. Different levels of support are available for different prices. A subscription is part of the Azure Service. You will need to find what type of service you need.

If you need to negotiate the price, based on the enterprise agreement or per commitment, the price schema is available. You just need to speak with a partner.

You can also pay with your credit card, but you will need to read the documentation online.

What other advice do I have?

In summary, if you would like to work with a product that addresses security in the cloud, or in a multi-cloud environment then this is exactly the product. There is no need to implement anything else.

There are multiple things that are absolutely nice about this product. That said, there is no such thing as a perfect product.

I would rate Azure Security Center a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
JJ
System Administrator at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 20
Very good dashboard and quite stable but needs more granularity

Pros and Cons

  • "The dashboard is very good. It gives our clients a lot of information and allows them to have a complete overview of the system. Everything is visible in one glance."
  • "The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available."

What is most valuable?

The dashboard is very good. It gives our clients a lot of information and allows them to have a complete overview of the system. Everything is visible in one glance.

What needs improvement?

The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available. 

Even though the TLS is only allotted for a single application, single box, and everything else is completely up to date, it just gives us an inaccurate reporting of how secure the environment actually is.

The solution could use a bit more granularity.

For how long have I used the solution?

I believe we've been using the solution for one and a half to two years at this point.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I haven't had any real problems with the solution's stability. I'm trying to think of any complaints that anybody may have had. It's always worked whenever we needed it to. I'd describe it as reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is actually easy to scale. You'd be surprised how many cloud solutions out there that aren't scalable. I don't even know why some are in the cloud. As far as this solution is concerned, I've taken it up to a higher medium-sized company. I've scaled as high as 4,500 users. I'm just not sure if it is infinitely scalable. I don't know if it would scale into the tens of thousands. 

In terms of increasing usage in the future, we'll use it as required. It all depends on the client for us. We're solely dependent on what they want and which solution they want to go with.

How are customer service and technical support?

It's like with any vendor, it's hit and miss. Sometimes you get the new person, sometimes you get the person that's been there for five years. You have to go in asking exactly what you want and use probing questions, and if you work with them enough, you learn what the right answer is. However, you ask those same questions, anyway, upfront. It gives you a baseline at least of where their technical expertise is. Just because they're on the help desk doesn't mean that they know what they're doing.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We use Intune for a lot of the app security purposes with Office 365, and then once we actually get into the AD section, it's just that a lot of people are really getting Office Secure Scores right now.

How was the initial setup?

I've had both complex and straightforward implementations. Some of them can be extremely complex. It's all just tailored to what the client wants. I have other setups where everything is very basic ad easy and all the client wants is some basic reporting and a few easy policies. 

If you utilize everything, then it might take a while for deployment, and also the implementation could be extended. It's all very client-specific.

We're an MSP, so we have massive teams all over the place and I couldn't accurately say how many people it takes to maintain the solution. I know that, generally, you have one project manager and then you would have the main admin who was setting up the portal, but then you have other security personnel that goes in there and does the work on the different sections. It takes a couple of people, but I couldn't give you a hard number as to how many people a typical setup would need for maintenance.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't have any idea what the cost of the solution is. That aspect of the product is handled by a separate department.

What other advice do I have?

We're a Microsoft partner.

The solution works for us, however, a client has its own needs and requirements. It's not a one-size-fits-all solution.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
MK
Cloud Security Design Lead at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Provides an excellent overview of the company security setup which benefits the various teams

Pros and Cons

  • "Provides a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization."
  • "No possibility to write or edit any capability."

What is our primary use case?

Primary use case of this solution has changed depending on the company I've been working in. In my previous job they were using it as a CWPP, cloud workload protection. In my current job it's used for the same purpose but we also use it for monitoring security policies, to enforce new policies and audit them. We also use it to meet some of the compliance requirements as well. We're partners with Azure and I'm the cloud security design lead. 

What is most valuable?

I personally like the features of the daily recommendations because that's a major deal, and it hosts Microsoft products so it has visibility. If you are bringing in a third party to get a high level of visibility, then a lot of work is required to get that level of capability. This product gives a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization which can be used by the security and operation teams. It provides alerts to the security team on the one hand, and all the AI and ML based detections on the other. It's very beneficial for our security and assault teams. In addition, it provides recommendations for the operations teams who need to sustain a high level of security. It's an important capability. 

What needs improvement?

I'm quite active on the Azure product blogs. We're able to provide recommendations to Microsoft and they work together with Azure towards achieving them. One of the issues with the product is that it's not possible to write or edit any capability. For example, if there is a false positive detection on the security center, the only option I have is to flag it off. I can dismiss the alert, but there is no option to provide comments or reviews, so that somebody else looking into the portal can brief them. 

I'd like to see some additional features that would include an option for the security team to provide comments on the alerts and also to improve the recommendations. I would like to see them fine tuned. We're also getting a lot of false positive alerts and Azure can reduce that using the Microsoft AI and ML feature.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for two and a half years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a very stable solution. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We've never had issues with scalability. We have over 50 engineers using the solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

Our company has subscribed to premium support from Microsoft so we can open premium tickets. The support team are always available and we haven't come across any issues in the past.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very straightforward. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We don't have a say in pricing, it's up to the product vendor. When you compare with other CWPP or server cloud protection products, I believe the Center is well priced. The customer has flexibility to choose which modules they want to use. There is a free version and a paid version and the customer makes a choice based on the organization's security strategy. If you're going to use add-ons or anything more feature rich, then you'd have to pay extra, but the standard product is a fixed price.

What other advice do I have?

If you're in the world of cloud and your company is using Azure as their primary cloud, I think Azure Security Center is a must-have feature, because it provides a bird's eye view of the entire security position of the organization. The solution is integrated and there is service from Microsoft. New features are being added regularly and I think it's a great solution. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Jijo_Joseph
Managing Partner at Digitaiken
Real User
Top 5
We saved money by consolidating into a single solution

Pros and Cons

  • "We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard."
  • "I felt that there was disconnection in terms of understanding the UI. The communication for moving from the old UI to the new UI could be improved. It was a bit awkward."

What is our primary use case?

We had multiple use cases at my previous company. I changed companies during their implementation stages of this solution. From what I saw, the solution has a good use case for SIEM.

How has it helped my organization?

It helped improve my previous organization's security posture. Their previous solution was running separately in each region. That has now been centralized by moving to the cloud. This was a huge change for their operations because they used to have multiple vendors managing their SIEM. Now, that has been consolidated under a single vendor. This consolidation has improved response times.

What is most valuable?

We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard.

What needs improvement?

I felt that there was disconnection in terms of understanding the UI. The communication for moving from the old UI to the new UI could be improved. It was a bit awkward.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Azure Security Center for five to six years. I was using it as my previous organization up until six months ago.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability was good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution was very much scalable.

Overall, there were around 150,000 users beginning to use it at the organization.

How are customer service and technical support?

We didn't use technical support directly from Microsoft. We used the third-parties' support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were previously using multiple solutions that integrated with SAP. For example, one region would be running QRadar and another region would be using Symantec. Each region of the company was just running it in silo mode off their internal Exchange. As part of centralizing a global solution, we chose to go with Azure Security Center, because our on-prem solution was not really working for us. This is why we started using Azure Security Center.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was easy; it was not complex.

The deployment took a month.

The transition went well. I didn't see any challenges.

What about the implementation team?

The setup was done by a third-party vendor, Fujitsu, who was very good. There was also another vendor, Microland, who had good knowledge and helped us with building it.

Not too many people were needed for the transition between solutions. I am unsure of the number of people needed because multiple activities were being run during the process, e.g., SharePoint migration.

What was our ROI?

The solution helped out management a lot. It reduced about 50% of the time needed to spend on this after implementation.

The organization saved money by consolidating into one solution instead of two or three. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Microsoft's licensing and pricing are sometimes complicated. If someone is new to Microsoft's licensing, they might have difficulty with it.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We might have looked at other competitors. However, Azure Security Center was attractive because of its licensing, which was packaged with the Office 365 licensing, as well as the fact that it is a single solution.

What other advice do I have?

I liked the centralization that it offered. However, I am cautious about the licensing part because I am unsure how you would manage the solution if it wasn't bundled.

When we started, our team didn't make a clear roadmap, which slowed us down. I recommend that you clearly define your roadmap before getting started.

The solution is very good. I would rate it as eight out of 10.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
DB
Sr Cybersecurity Engineer at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
Reliable and easy to scale, with good remote workforce capabilities

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable features of this solution are the remote workforce capabilities and the general experience of the remote workforce."
  • "Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government."

What is our primary use case?

We are using Azure Security Center for software development.

It's a cloud service that includes the security center and tailoring certain options.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features of this solution are the remote workforce capabilities and the general experience of the remote workforce.

What needs improvement?

Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government.

The initial setup could be simplified.

In the next release, I would like to see more development in the area of NECES scanning or Splunk, or Universal Forwarding. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Azure Security Center for six months.

We are working with Microsoft Azure for the government version of the cloud.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is stable. It's 100% guaranteed and I've never had any problems with it other than some planned IT downtime.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Azure Security Center is scalable. We've been able to scale pretty well for a workforce that has over 400 developers.

How are customer service and technical support?

My experience with technical support was more like a consultation. "Tell us what you need and we'll see if we can do that for you."

In some cases, they had to develop on top of the commercial product just to conform to certain government regulations and cybersecurity requirements.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we did not use a different solution, this is the first option.

How was the initial setup?

It was pretty complex. We had to go back and negotiate with Azure on a few of the options that were commercially available, but not in the government products.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm not privy to pricing information, but I know it's probably close to a million dollars a year.

The pricing is comparable. The features that we're getting are tailored to what we need.

It was the best fit for us.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

In the future, we will be looking at government brands of the same thing that are part of the DISA.

After looking at DISA's product options, they usually select commercial versions and government versions of commercial products like Azure. For example, Amazon Web Services, and Google cloud.

This was our first option or our first go-to solution because we were considering not only Microsoft but Amazon and Google as well.

Microsoft seemed to have most of what we need.

What other advice do I have?

I am currently working on my Cloud Security Certification.

For anyone who is considering this solution, from a cybersecurity standpoint, if they are doing any kind of scanning, vulnerability scanning for software or systems and they're feeding into the cloud, make sure to check whether the security center doesn't offer adequate options for them to work with. If not, then look into other software like Spunk. They look into everything and they have plenty of conversations with the staff. That's the cloud security provider.

I would rate Azure Security Center an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Georges-Emmanuel TOPE
Founder & CEO at Cloud Steroids
Real User
Top 20
Effective ransomware feature, useful file system protection, and stable

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable features are ransomware protection and access controls. The solution has helped us secure some folders on our systems from unauthorized modifications."
  • "The solution could improve by being more intuitive and easier to use requiring less technical knowledge."

What is our primary use case?

We are consultants and we have customers using Azure Defender for the protection of their businesses. Many of our customers are in the financial industry.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are ransomware protection and access controls. The solution has helped us secure some folders on our systems from unauthorized modifications. 

This solution has been very useful for securing core funds and preventing them from being hijacked by any application or spyware for our banking customers. People can be susceptible to scams easily because they are not aware of the current threat trends. We are able to scan for threats which have helped us limit the risks in the future.

What needs improvement?

The solution could improve by being more intuitive and easier to use requiring less technical knowledge.

In a future release, the solution could improve by providing more automation and clarity in the autoanalysis. When we provide our customers with a Microsoft solution for security, Microsoft has to go beyond the basic expectations to impress the customers.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Azure Defender for approximately one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Azure Defender is scalable. We have not found any issue.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support has been responsive. However, we need to be connected to the right level of support. For example, if you are a customer or if you purchased this solution as part of a certification, your level of satisfaction for support will depend on the provider you purchased it from. Microsoft will not be the one doing support for you. If you do not have premier support with Microsoft, as a cloud provider, you will have to support your customers when they are in need. Without Microsoft's premier support you only have break-fix support and if there is a major issue you will not have the help to understand what is happening, or how to prevent it from happening in the future.

How was the initial setup?

The implementation can be difficult if there is not any prior training. There is a lot of elements that have to be understood.

What about the implementation team?

We have an advisor that provides us with information to help us control and configure the solution. Additionally, they have assisted us with automation.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The price of the solution is good for the features we receive and there is an additional cost for Microsoft premier support. However, some of my potential customers have found it to be expensive and have gone on to choose another solution. Additionally, if the customer does not take the full package from Azure Defender it makes it difficult for us to manage the solution for them.

What other advice do I have?

I rate Azure Defender an eight out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Flag as inappropriate
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Microsoft Defender for Cloud Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.