User and entity behavior analytics (UEBA) tools have lately been gaining popularity in the cybersecurity world and for good reason. In comparison with traditional threat detection and prevention, UEBA software is capable of detecting a wide range of threats, catching threats early, and analyzing vast amounts of data. However, these solutions are a supplement to other security tools, not a replacement. While there are many benefits to implementing UEBA in order to fortify your security posture, there are also drawbacks. Below are several advantages and disadvantages of UEBA software to consider when thinking about deploying it in your organization.
Pros
Insider Threat Detection
Traditional threat detection tools and solutions are often designed primarily to keep external actors from gaining access to an organization’s network, devices, accounts, or systems. Because insider threats arise from authorized and trusted users, these measures are not sufficient to detect or prevent them. UEBA, on the other hand, monitors user activity in order to identify anomalous behaviors from within the organization.
Reduces Risk of Human Error
With UEBA, the bulk of the work of collecting, analyzing, and comparing data is done automatically using machine learning algorithms and artificial intelligence. Thanks to this, security administrators no longer need to manually sift through vast amounts of data. UEBA tools are automated and do not get tired or slip up in the same way that humans are liable to do.
Visibility into User Behavior
While the data collected by UEBA software is for the purpose of monitoring activity to flag suspicious behavior, it can also provide a window into typical user behavior. Using UEBA data, security teams can get a more comprehensive understanding of how users in the organization access systems, who is using what resources and when. This way, security policies, and measures can be adapted to the specific habits of users in a particular organization.
Unknown Threat Detection
Because UEBA’s threat detection comes from monitoring and analyzing real user and entity behaviors, it does not require known signatures, rules, or other triggers that signal an attack. This means UEBA tools are capable of detecting and mitigating threats that are newly emerging and likely to be passed over by traditional threat detection and prevention.
Reduces Labor and Costs
By automating many of the processes involved in threat detection and mitigation, UEBA enables fewer security professionals to do more work to protect an enterprise. It can reduce the budget needed for cybersecurity measures, as well as saving an organization a great deal of money in insider threat remediation by detecting, and preventing risky or suspicious behavior from internal actors.
Cons
Takes Time to Establish Baseline
Because of the way that UEBA works, it is not ready to start preventing attacks immediately after deployment. It takes a while for the software to monitor and analyze enough user and entity behavior data to establish a useful baseline of normal activity. This baseline is necessary in order to identify anomalous behavior, and it requires a bit of patience.
Privacy Concerns
While UEBA is difficult to beat in the realm of detecting insider threats, there have been some concerns raised over the ethical ramifications of such close monitoring of user behavior. Anonymized user behavior data may hinder the efficacy of the software by preventing certain connections based on who is performing an action, but users may object to their activity being closely tracked and analyzed without the shroud of anonymity.
Requires Particular Training
The data produced by UEBA software from monitoring and analyzing user behavior is unique and more complex than other systems. Security professionals who lack the proper training may not be able to understand the data fully, thus obstructing their ability to interpret and respond to any potential threats brought to their attention by the tool’s data.
Not Comprehensive Security
UEBA is a useful and effective tool for what it’s meant to do, but it does not cover everything; rather, it must be implemented as part of a robust and layered security strategy that employs multiple solutions and tools for protection. No solution will work for all security concerns, but organizations may be hesitant to add another security tool to their repertoire.
Large Initial Investment
Although UEBA can save an organization money over time, the up-front cost of purchasing the software, implementing it, and ensuring that analysts are trained can be a drawback. Larger companies are more likely to see the software pay for itself faster, but small businesses might be discouraged by the cost of investment at the deployment stage.
Conclusion
There are a number of factors for an organization to take into consideration when thinking about whether or not to implement UEBA software in the first place, not to mention the “many options and approaches” to implementation. Depending on the specific tools utilized and the manner in which UEBA functionality is deployed, some of the benefits and drawbacks can be emphasized or mitigated. At the end of the day, only an organization’s cybersecurity professionals or security teams can determine if and how to implement UEBA software.
Author:
PJ Bradley is a writer on a wide variety of topics, passionate about learning and helping people above all else. Holding a bachelor’s degree from Oakland University, PJ enjoys using a lifelong desire to understand how things work to write about subjects that inspire interest. Most of PJ’s free time is spent reading and writing. PJ is also a regular writer at Bora.
Follow Techdee for more!