SOC-as-a-Service, also known as MDR or SOC service, exists because businesses need security control. However, all businesses struggle with the upfront costs associated with establishing an internal SOC.
In practice, businesses purchase SOC services to avoid the burden of building and operating an internal security operation. The paradox is that businesses can still be affected by ongoing burdens in the form of operational costs and "alert fatigue."
While operational costs are an expected and visible part of the service, "alert fatigue" has become a hidden cost that many do not foresee. When SOC providers themselves become overwhelmed by too many alerts, the problem begins to 'spill over' and directly affect the customer.
The result is that the company's IT department is forced to spend a disproportionate amount of time validating false positives or handling low-risk alerts. This reduces the department's capacity to focus on strategic tasks. At the same time, it increases the risk that genuinely serious threats are not seen or handled in time.
Why are alerts forwarded?
SOC providers often lack the deep, contextual understanding of the company's systems, environment, and risk strategy. This is necessary for effective security assessment, resulting in alerts that:
- Lack business-specific context – generic alerts that do not consider what is normal activity in your environment
- Require resource-intensive internal investigation – alerts that cannot be handled without significant investment from the company's own employees
- Ignore the company's actual risk profile – alerts that do not align with what constitutes a real risk for the company
A SOC service should be much more than an alert center. SOC operations that only respond to alerts miss the goal of supporting the company's purpose. What is needed is a change in mindset. A mindset that is as strategic as it is tactical, where reducing noise is prioritized over the fear of missing potential threats.
A strategic SOC differs from a mere alarm center by:
- Prioritizing threats based on the company's specific risk profile, not based on generic threat assessments.
- Conducting thorough analyses based on the company's environment before alerting, to support the company by reducing as much "noise" as possible.
- Tailoring the response to the company's needs, with an understanding of critical systems and business processes.
- Establishing an effective communication channel for continuous improvement, being a partnership, not just a supplier relationship.
What can be the solution for businesses purchasing SOC services?
Most SOC service agreements focus on SLAs for response time but omit the most important aspect: alert quality. Businesses should demand clear qualitative goals such as: How many alerts represent real threats within the company's defined risk strategy.
Request the implementation of tiered alert systems that improve response efficiency. By using separate channels based on severity, the company can more easily prioritize its efforts. Automation solutions can further streamline this through, for example, interactive Teams messages with predefined response options.
A strategic SOC provider will actively invite continuous feedback using feedback loops. They will aim to use this information to improve detection rules and alert criteria. This should be a formalized process, not a coincidence.
Why build a system-based approach instead of buying a "ready-made" service?
Businesses have several choices when it comes to investing in a SOC operation. They can either invest in a standardized solution from a SOC provider or a tailored and system-based approach.
Standardized solutions often lack the deep contextual understanding necessary to distinguish between real threats and false alarms in specific environments. This applies regardless of whether it is IT or OT environments.
A SOC for the IT environment must be adapted in the same way that a SOC for the OT environment must adapt to the company's systems, processes, and routines. What is crucial is not whether it is IT or OT, but whether the security function is tailored to the company's actual needs, purpose, and context.
A system-based approach brings a paradigm shift. Instead of adapting the company to an external security service, you build a system tailored to the company's unique needs, challenges, and strategic goals. This will enable a security function that goes far beyond traditional reactive alarm handling.
By building a system-based approach, the company can ensure that the SOC operation functions as a strategic partner in risk management – not just a source of more tasks requiring follow-up.
A good system-based SOC will have integrated feedback loops where the security team and IT department continuously improve the system based on actual incidents. This creates an adaptive and learning security operation that becomes increasingly precisely tailored over time.
In a time when cyber threats are becoming increasingly sophisticated and targeted, a generic approach to security can leave critical blind spots. Regardless of which SOC model the company chooses, the responsibility for security can never be fully outsourced – it remains with the company itself.
Explore more
Critical thinking in security analysis: Reducing subjective interpretation
When the normal is disrupted: Exposing threats in OT environments
Malware in the engine room: Detecting deviations from normal operation
