Skip to main content
MANAGED DETECTION & RESPONSE

A dashboard full of alerts is in every SOC. The question is whether it catches the attack that matters.

An attacker who gets in is seen before they reach the crown jewels. Not because coverage was ticked off, but because the detection has been tested.

MITRE ATT&CKNIST CSF 2.0ISO 27001NIS2
FramesMITRE ATT&CK, NIST CSF 2.0 (DE/RS), ISO 27001 A.5.7/A.8.16, NIS2 art. 21, DORA
For whomCISO, CIO, security operations, security manager
Lead timeFirst coverage picture 2-4 weeks, first tested detection on the critical techniques 6-10 weeks

Key challenges

The problem is not the tooling. It is that no one knows whether you would see it.

You have a SIEM, a SOC or an MDR contract and still no coherent picture that holds. A dashboard is not detection that catches what matters.

14

median dwell time, days

A breach goes unnoticed for days

The time between entry and discovery is falling, but an attacker still has days to move across your estate. And roughly half of intrusions are still surfaced from outside the organisation, not by your own detection.

Mandiant M-Trends 2026, median dwell time around 14 days, B, order of magnitude.

60%

of alerts are never investigated

More alerts is not better detection

Alerts pile up, capacity is finite and the majority are never investigated. A sizeable share are false alarms: detection on poorly configured sources has analysts chasing noise rather than threat. That is a process problem, not a tooling problem.

Order of magnitude; Tines Voice of the SOC 2025, vendor research, B.

30%

of attacker techniques demonstrably covered

Coverage on paper is not tested detection

Most SOCs lean on a platform’s default rules and assume the detection works. But coverage that has never been tested against what an attacker actually does will not fire at the moment it has to. The question is not whether you have a SIEM, but which techniques you demonstrably catch.

Radian position via MITRE ATT&CK as a coverage frame, C; order of magnitude, not a hard measurement.

The question for the board

Would we see it when it goes wrong?

Regulators and leadership do not ask how many alerts come in or whether round-the-clock coverage is ticked off. They ask whether the organisation would see it when it goes wrong, and whether the monitoring spend is aligned to the risk. That is the difference between a green light and tested detection.

The difference

Coverage on paper, or tested detection.

Not whether you monitor, but whether the detection fires on the techniques that matter to you, and whether it holds once an attacker is inside.

Classic MDR or SOCWith Radian

A platform or contract as the solution

Detection is bought as a product: a SIEM switched on, an MDR contract signed, round-the-clock ticked off. Success is measured in connected sources and processed alerts.

Starting point

Detection as a capability, not a product

We first decide what you must reliably see and which techniques matter. The model, the sources and the roles follow from that, not the other way round.

The platform’s default rules

Detection content comes from the tool’s defaults, not from what attackers in your sector actually do. Where you are blind stays invisible.

Coverage

Aimed at the relevant techniques

We map your real coverage against the techniques of the actors relevant to you, via MITRE ATT&CK. The gaps become visible before an attacker finds them.

Assumed to fire

The detection counts as working because the rule exists. Whether an alert actually fires against a real attacker technique is never put to the test.

Testing

Proven to actually fire

We test the detection with attack simulation and purple-teaming: does it fire, and at the right moment. Only then do you know the coverage is more than an assumption.

Outsourced and out of view

The contract suggests the detection is handled. But when an incident hits, you face the board, not the provider, and a grip on the execution is missing.

Accountability

Owned and inspectable

You can outsource the work, not the accountability. We place the roles and the response so you keep control, independent of your MSSP.

How it works

From a dashboard full of alerts to detection that holds.

On the left, what feeds detection; in the middle, the order that decides and tests; on the right, what you keep. Your existing SIEM, SOC and MDR contract stay in place.

Your telemetry
Workstations and server workloads
Identity and access rights
Cloud and online software
Network and east-west traffic
Applications and APIs
Industrial systems and smart devices
Asset context and criticality
normalises›››
Five steps, continuous
The frameWhat you must reliably detectWhich attacker techniques are relevant to you
01
Define
What must be detected first: the protect surface and the crown jewels, plus the techniques that matter for your sector.
02
Map
Your real coverage against those techniques, via MITRE ATT&CK, not against a tool’s default rules. That is how the blind spots become visible.
03
Test
Whether the detection actually fires, with attack simulation and purple-teaming. A covered technique is only tested once an alert truly fires.
04
Close the gaps
Detection engineering on the gaps, with content and runbooks so an alert is acted on and does not sit in the queue.
05
Sustain
An ongoing cadence: the estate and the threat change, the detection and the test move with them, independent of your MSSP.
Continuous
delivers›››
What you keep
Tested coverage on the techniques that matter
Runbooks that are proven, not assumed
A shorter time to detect an attack
Fewer blind spots, less noise in the queue
Evidence for the board that the right things are caught
A grip on execution, independent of your MSSP
An ongoing cadence that keeps the detection sharp

The distinction

Test first, then trust

The usual advice buys detection as a product: switch on a platform, sign a contract, tick off coverage. So we test first whether the detection fires at all against real attacker techniques before we count it as working. Not an assumption that the rule fires, but evidence that it does.

That works because the bottleneck rarely sits in the tool, but in which use cases are built, which sources are connected and who acts on the alert. The quality of a SOC comes from people and process, not from the amount of tooling.

Works with what you already run

Your existing SIEM, SOC and MDR contract stay in place. We do not build a new layer on top, we make the detection you already have demonstrably work. A tool or service is a means, not an end.

Independent of your MSSP

The detection is yours, not the provider’s who runs it. Co-managed, in-house or MDR is a choice that fits your maturity and what you can sustain. We advise the model that works, regardless of which platform sits beneath it.

Our seniors also execute

The market delivers a report saying monitor your estate and leaves the execution with you, or the outsourced Tier 1 who drops off the moment it gets hard. The same senior who decides what must be detected builds the detection and tests it.

Sector experience

The platforms we advise on, we've delivered them ourselves.

We delivered the leading SIEM and SOAR platforms in these sectors. Where asked, we advised on selection and setup.

  • Banking and financial services
  • Energy infrastructure
  • FMCG and industry
  • Insurance
  • Crypto and trading
  • Legal services

From practice

Detection that sees more, for less money.

A global industrial multinational missed attacks while the SIEM bill climbed. We built a cost-efficient multi-SIEM architecture that sees more, carried by the same team.

Global industrial multinational · ± 27,000 workplacesMore coverage, lower cost, the same teamRead the customer story

Get started

Would you see it when an attacker is inside?

Not a hundred-page detection plan. One conversation in which we decide what you must reliably see, and whether your current SOC or MDR catches the techniques that matter to you.

Plan a conversation

30 minutes with a senior, no pitch.

Request a conversationCall directly088 - 163 23 25