Home

/

techsearch-case-study-mdr

/

buyer-requirements-cyber-monitoring-incident-response

Buyer Requirement: Cyber Security Monitoring / Incident Response

About the Buyer Requirement

This page contains the original requirements submitted by an Australian not-for-profit organisation seeking a Managed Detection and Response (MDR) provider and cyber incident response support.

The requirement was published through StrategyMix TechSearch, where relevant IT suppliers were invited to submit proposals against the buyer's requirements.

Authenticity

Buyer requirements are reproduced as originally submitted, with formatting adjustments for readability.

Search Status: Closed

View Case Study

Understand how TechSearch helps IT buyers

Buyer Profile

Job Role:

Cyber Security Manager

Industry:

Not For Profit

Headcount:

501 to 1000

Revenue:

A$ 101 to 500 Million

Region:

Australia South (SA/VIC/TAS)

Buyer Search Summary

Budget Status:

Pending

Purchase Timeframe:

6 to 12 Months

Product Description:

I am looking for a 24x7 cyber security monitoring provider as well as cyber incident response support.

It would be helpful if the provider can utilise our existing investment in our current security monitoring tools, but there is an opportunity to onboard a more complete SIEM solution to upgrade our existing one.

I envisage that the incident response support component might be arranged on a retainer basis, with payment per incident. However, that is subject to whichever arrangement offers the most affordable solution.

Questions

Q1. Can you ingest and correlate data from CrowdStrike, Mimecast, Netskope, and Graylog?

Q2. Can you enrich alerts with threat intelligence or contextual data from these platforms?

Q3. How do you prioritise alerts and reduce false positives?

Q4. Do you offer services to enhance or replace Graylog with a more scalable SIEM?

Q5. Do you offer retainer-based IR services or on-demand support?

Interested in understanding how vendors responded?

See the MDR case study to understand how eight vendors responded to these requirements, how their indicative pricing compared and what procurement outcome the buyer achieved.