BUILD OR BUY?
A THREAT INTELLIGENCE PLATFORM
There are many factors to take into account when deciding whether to build or buy a cyber threat intelligence platform. Here are 5 key considerations.
Finding someone, let alone a small development team, with the skillset to build core software components of a cyber threat intelligence platform is rare. Building an internal team to support even a small homegrown application will require a minimum of four full-time employees: two developers, a dedicated database/big data engineer and a quality assurance resource. Foregoing a dedicated resource and only delivering a subset of this functionality will quickly reach a ceiling of effectiveness significantly short of your end goal.
As a cyber threat intelligence platform gets more use, analysts’ feature requests will naturally increase — especially if the goal of the threat intelligence platform is to aggregate intelligence across several teams or departments. Resources are needed to drive real innovation, or you’ll be playing catch-up with other solutions offered by companies in the threat intelligence platform business.
Aggregating internal and external threat data, logs and events into your threat intelligence platform and translating them into a uniform format for use is a huge, complex undertaking that warrants a full-time database engineer. Applying the threat intelligence that you want to act on to the appropriate technologies in your sensor grid means integrating with your firewall, IPS, IDS, NetFlow, endpoint protection, etc. with multiple APIs from multiple vendors.
Consider the time it will take you to properly design, architect, develop and test a fully functional cyber threat intelligence platform. Evaluating and implementing third-party solutions with a vendor can get you up and running in a matter of weeks versus months. Additional time means your threat operations program won’t be able to perform as you need it to, and this affords adversaries a greater window of opportunity to launch attacks.
There’s no established track record for proprietary solutions; these solutions don’t undergo third party testing to validate performance, and SLAs typically aren’t in place. Not only must you deal with incident response but you also have to address any gaps in solution functionality that may have contributed to the success of the attack.
Regardless of how many capabilities your security teams and management identify as critical technical and business requirements, you need to consider the tradeoffs in the juxtaposition of build vs. buy. To learn more, download our guide.
REQUEST A DEMO
Ready to make the most out of your cyber threat intelligence with ThreatQ? Get in touch with us today to schedule a demo.