Specific solution · Cybersecurity + Assurance

Threat Detection + Response

Turn security signals into controlled action.

EINO connects relevant telemetry to threat-informed detections, investigation paths, and rehearsed response. Analysts see why activity matters, who can act, and how containment and recovery protect the operation.

Detection operating trace

Response authority controlled
Telemetry sourcesDetection + correlationConfirmed threatContain + recover

Evidence framework

Define proof before production.

Baselines and targets are agreed for each engagement. These dimensions shape what the team evaluates; they are not promised historical results.

Coverage + quality

Can the team detect what matters?

Map priority threats to observable behavior, required telemetry, detection logic, and known blind spots before measuring alert volume.

  • Threat-behavior coverage
  • True + false positive rate
  • Telemetry completeness
  • Detection latency

Investigation + control

Can evidence support a safe decision?

Test whether analysts can establish scope, preserve evidence, escalate to the right owner, and contain activity within approved authority.

  • Time to triage
  • Time to contain
  • Case evidence quality
  • Approval + rollback readiness

Operability + recovery

Can the organization sustain the capability?

Exercise staffing, handoffs, recovery validation, tuning, and service ownership under realistic load and operating conditions.

  • Analyst workload
  • Recovery objectives
  • Use-case health
  • Exercise findings closed

Solution portfolio

Four parts of a connected detection and response capability.

Detection engineering, incident response, security operations, and threat intelligence work as one system: evidence enters once, decisions remain traceable, and each incident improves future coverage.

DTH

Detection Engineering + Threat Hunting

Detect adversary behavior with evidence the team can explain.

Translate priority threats into testable use cases across identity, endpoint, cloud, network, application, and operational telemetry. Hunting examines hypotheses and blind spots; validated findings become maintained detections with owners and quality measures.

Technical capability

  • Threat modeling + behavior mapping
  • Telemetry requirement + coverage analysis
  • Detection-as-code engineering
  • Behavioral analytics + correlation
  • Hypothesis-led threat hunting
  • Validation, tuning + lifecycle ownership

Business application

  • Credential misuse + account takeover
  • Lateral movement + privilege escalation
  • Cloud control-plane abuse
  • Endpoint persistence + execution
  • Data staging + exfiltration
  • Operational technology boundary monitoring

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

14 daysSource 1

global median dwell time

Mandiant investigations completed during 2025
52%Source 1

of activity first found internally

Detection source across Mandiant 2025 investigations
122 daysSource 1

median dwell in two stealth-focused categories

Cyber espionage and DPRK IT worker investigations
32%Source 1

of intrusions began with exploits

Most common initial infection vector in the same study
IRO

Incident Response + Orchestration

Move from a confirmed threat to authorized containment and recovery.

Connect triage, investigation, decision authority, communications, containment, eradication, and recovery in rehearsed workflows. Automation prepares evidence and performs bounded actions where approval and reversibility are clear.

Technical capability

  • Incident classification + case management
  • Evidence acquisition + forensic coordination
  • Playbook + decision-rights engineering
  • Security orchestration + approved automation
  • Containment, eradication + recovery workflows
  • Exercise, communications + post-incident review

Business application

  • Ransomware + destructive intrusion response
  • Compromised identity containment
  • Cloud account + token compromise
  • Business email compromise
  • Third-party + supply-chain incidents
  • Critical service recovery coordination

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

22 secSource 1

median criminal access hand-off

Initial-access to secondary-group hand-off observed in 2025
72 minSource 2

fastest access-to-exfiltration case

Frontline investigations summarized by Unit 42
29 minSource 3

average eCrime breakout time

CrowdStrike observations across 2025
27 secSource 3

fastest observed breakout

Fastest lateral-movement observation in the same report
SOC

Security Operations + Observability

Make coverage, case flow, service health, and ownership visible.

Design the security operations model around priority services and response decisions. Normalize evidence, connect investigation surfaces, monitor use-case health, and expose queues, gaps, handoffs, and recovery status without turning the SOC into a wall of dashboards.

Technical capability

  • Telemetry pipeline + schema engineering
  • SIEM, EDR, NDR + cloud integration
  • Alert enrichment + case correlation
  • Queue, escalation + service-level design
  • Detection health + coverage observability
  • Operating metrics + analyst feedback loops

Business application

  • Enterprise + co-managed SOC operations
  • Identity, endpoint + cloud investigation
  • Critical service security monitoring
  • Third-party event coordination
  • On-call escalation + major incident handoff
  • Coverage and control reporting

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

87%Source 2

of incidents needed multiple evidence sources

Unit 42 investigations reviewed for its 2026 IR report
2–10Source 2

evidence sources used per investigation

At least two in most cases; up to 10 in complex cases
65%Source 2

of initial access used identity techniques

Unit 42 frontline incident-response findings
48%Source 4

of breaches involved a third party

Verizon analysis of the 2026 DBIR dataset
TIV

Threat Intelligence + Adversary Validation

Use intelligence to change coverage, priorities, and readiness.

Connect strategic, operational, and technical intelligence to the organization’s assets and threat model. Purple-team exercises and controlled adversary emulation test whether telemetry, detections, decisions, and recovery paths work against relevant behavior.

Technical capability

  • Threat landscape + priority intelligence requirements
  • Indicator, behavior + campaign enrichment
  • Threat-informed coverage mapping
  • Purple teaming + adversary emulation
  • Detection control validation
  • Intelligence feedback + briefing workflows

Business application

  • Sector + geopolitical threat monitoring
  • Critical infrastructure readiness
  • Campaign exposure + compromise assessment
  • Control and detection validation
  • Executive + operational threat briefings
  • Incident scoping + proactive hunting

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

42%Source 3

increase in zero-days exploited pre-disclosure

CrowdStrike threat-intelligence observations for 2025
266%Source 3

rise in state-linked cloud intrusions

Cloud-conscious activity attributed to state-nexus actors
200+Source 5

UK critical-infrastructure incidents

Incidents managed by the NCSC in the year to May 2026
~75%Source 5

linked to hostile states

NCSC assessment of those critical-infrastructure incidents
View research sources (5)

These are external benchmarks, estimates, and published case-study results—not guaranteed EINO outcomes. Results depend on scope, system conditions, implementation, and operating context.

  1. 01

    Google Cloud / Mandiant · 2026 · Frontline incident investigation report

    M-Trends 2026 Report: Executive Edition

    Findings from more than 500,000 hours of Mandiant frontline investigations in 2025, covering dwell time, detection source, initial infection vectors, and criminal access hand-offs.

    Read source
  2. 02

    Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 · 2026 · Frontline investigation analysis

    Inside the Modern SOC: The 72-Minute Race

    Analysis drawing on Unit 42 customer environments, SOC assessments, hunting engagements, and its 2026 Global Incident Response Report.

    Read source
  3. 03

    CrowdStrike · 2026 · Threat intelligence report

    2026 CrowdStrike Global Threat Report

    Threat-hunting and intelligence observations from 2025, including eCrime breakout time, zero-day exploitation, and state-nexus cloud activity.

    Read source
  4. 04

    Verizon · 2026 · Multi-contributor breach dataset analysis

    2026 Data Breach Investigations Report

    Global incident and breach analysis covering third-party involvement, ransomware, vulnerability exploitation, and remediation patterns.

    Read source
  5. 05

    UK National Cyber Security Centre · 2026 · Official incident-management briefing

    Hostile states linked to three-quarters of cyber attacks affecting UK critical systems

    NCSC briefing on incidents affecting UK critical national infrastructure and its supporting ecosystem in the year to May 2026.

    Read source

Operating contexts

The constraints shape the system.

Information sensitivity, decision authority, service expectations, and review obligations change what a responsible implementation requires.

CNI

Government + critical infrastructure

Nationally significant services, operational technology, classified or sensitive networks, and cross-agency authority require segmented telemetry, tested escalation, and recovery paths that respect safety and mission continuity.

  • IT + OT visibility
  • State-linked activity
  • Cross-agency response
HLT

Healthcare + life sciences

Clinical availability, patient information, connected devices, research environments, and third parties change which response actions are safe and who must approve service isolation.

  • Clinical continuity
  • Identity + device signals
  • Ransomware readiness
FIN

Financial services

High-volume transactions, fraud and cyber overlap, privileged access, regulatory notification, evidence retention, and recovery obligations demand fast investigation with controlled decision rights.

  • Identity + transaction context
  • Case evidence
  • Containment authority

Enterprise architecture

Connect telemetry to recovery—and learning back to detection.

A production capability links collection, correlation, investigation, authorized containment, recovery evidence, and tuning. Identity, security, evidence, and ownership cross every stage.

01

Collect + normalize telemetry

Identity, endpoint, network, cloud, application, data, and OT signals enter through owned pipelines with schema, quality, retention, and time-synchronization controls.

02

Detect + correlate behavior

Threat-informed logic, baselines, enrichment, and correlation connect related activity while preserving the evidence behind each alert.

03

Investigate + manage the case

Analysts establish scope, confidence, affected services, evidence, severity, and the people authorized to decide the next action.

04

Contain + recover safely

Approved playbooks isolate accounts, devices, workloads, or pathways, then coordinate eradication, restoration, rollback, communications, and recovery validation.

05

Learn + tune coverage

Incident findings, exercises, false positives, missed behavior, and service changes feed detection content, playbooks, telemetry priorities, and ownership backlogs.

Controls that cross the system

  • Identity + access
  • Security + privacy
  • Evidence + chain of custody
  • Authority + ownership
  • Resilience + recovery

Operating patterns

  • Enterprise SOC
  • Co-managed SOC
  • Sector CSIRT
  • Hybrid IT + OT

Selected around coverage, evidence latency, response authority, service criticality, and accountable ownership.

Technology strategy

Choose tools by coverage, evidence quality, and operating fit.

The objective is not a larger toolset. Retain, integrate, consolidate, or replace data sources and response tools according to coverage, signal quality, latency, response authority, cost, and the team’s capacity to own them.

Automation supports accountable response

Automation can enrich evidence, open cases, and execute approved actions. It does not default to autonomous containment; authority, failure impact, reversibility, and human approval determine the response boundary.

  1. 01

    Preserve

    Retain useful telemetry + controls

    Keep a source or tool when it provides dependable coverage, sufficient evidence, timely data, clear ownership, and response value that exceeds its operating cost.

  2. 02

    Connect

    Integrate across investigation boundaries

    Link systems when analysts need shared identity, asset, threat, case, or recovery context but separate products and owners still serve a valid purpose.

  3. 03

    Simplify

    Consolidate overlapping capability

    Reduce duplicate collection, rules, queues, and licenses where consolidation improves signal quality and supportability without creating a material coverage or resilience gap.

  4. 04

    Change

    Replace what the team cannot operate

    Replace a source or tool when persistent gaps in coverage, quality, latency, response authority, cost, or owner capacity outweigh migration risk and retained value.

Delivery path

Engineer the use case, rehearse the response, then widen coverage.

Five stages establish a measurable baseline, prove detections against representative behavior, exercise safe containment, and transfer tuning and response ownership.

  1. 01Baseline

    What must the team see and protect?

    Map critical services, priority threats, current telemetry, detections, incident paths, recovery dependencies, measures, owners, and explicit exclusions.

    Coverage baseline + priorities
  2. 02Engineer

    Which use cases close a material gap?

    Design normalized evidence, correlation, detection logic, case enrichment, quality tests, response decisions, and health measures for a bounded set of threats.

    Use-case content + evidence plan
  3. 03Rehearse

    Can the response act safely?

    Run representative scenarios and adversary behavior through triage, investigation, approval, containment, rollback, recovery, and communications before production authority expands.

    Exercise evidence + safe playbooks
  4. 04Roll out

    How will coverage widen without losing control?

    Release by service or threat boundary, observe signal quality and analyst load, keep rollback paths active, and accept each increment against agreed evidence.

    Controlled release + rollback path
  5. 05Operate

    Who keeps the capability current?

    Transfer ownership, monitor use-case health, run recurring exercises, tune detections and playbooks, close findings, and prioritize new coverage as threats and systems change.

    Operating model + tuning backlog

A practical place to begin

Start with a Detection + Response Capability Assessment.

The assessment maps current coverage and operating constraints into prioritized use cases, a connected target architecture, an evidence plan, and a first delivery recommendation.

Assessment outputs

  • Current telemetry + detection coverage findings
  • Priority threats, use cases + operating measures
  • Connected target architecture + tool decisions
  • Evidence, containment + recovery control plan
  • Rollout, rollback + exercise path
  • First delivery recommendation + ownership model