Why 75% of Security Teams Struggle with Detection Management
The Hidden Crisis in Security Operations
Founder / CEO
The numbers tell a stark story: 75% of security teams are managing 100+ detection rules, with half managing over 250. Yet despite this investment in detection content, organizations struggle to articulate their threat coverage or demonstrate detection effectiveness. What's going wrong?
The Scale Problem Nobody Talks About
When security teams first implement detection capabilities, managing a dozen rules in a SIEM seems straightforward. Fast forward two years, and that same team is drowning in complexity:
They're managing 250+ detection rules spread across multiple platforms. Nearly half of all SOCs house rules in two or more technologies. 89% of teams experience multiple time-consuming detection tasks daily. And most troubling of all, they have zero visibility into which rules actually work.
This isn't a failure of the teams—it's a systemic problem born from how detection management evolved.
The Root Causes: Why Good Teams Fail
1. The Tool Sprawl Trap
Modern security stacks aren't monolithic. A typical enterprise runs SIEM platforms like Splunk, Sentinel, or QRadar alongside EDR solutions from CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, or Microsoft Defender. Add cloud security tools like AWS GuardDuty and Azure Defender, network detection systems, and custom detection logic, and you've got a complex ecosystem.
Each tool has its own rule syntax and language, management interface, deployment process, performance metrics, and version control approach (or lack thereof). What works in Splunk doesn't work in Sentinel. What deploys easily in your EDR requires a completely different process in your cloud security tools.
The result:
"Swivel chair" management where engineers spend more time navigating between tools than actually engineering detections.
2. The Visibility Vacuum
Ask most security leaders these questions:
Which detection rules fired in the last 30 days? What's your false positive rate by rule? Which MITRE techniques lack coverage? What percentage of rules are properly tuned? These aren't trick questions, but most security leaders can't answer them with confidence.
The uncomfortable truth: Most can't answer with confidence. The data exists—buried in logs, scattered across platforms, disconnected from the detection lifecycle.
The impact:
Teams operate blind, unable to optimize what they can't measure.
3. The Manual Deployment Bottleneck
Here's what deploying a new detection looks like in most organizations. You research and develop the detection logic, then translate it into multiple platform-specific formats. Next, you test in development (if you're lucky enough to have a dev environment), submit for change approval, manually deploy to each platform, update documentation (hopefully), and then cross your fingers because there's no systematic way to track if it's working.
What should take hours takes weeks. By the time you've navigated this gauntlet, the threat you were trying to detect has probably evolved, and you're already behind.
4. The Maintenance Debt
Detections aren't "set and forget." They require regular tuning based on false positive rates, updates when environments change, retirement when no longer relevant, and performance optimization as data volumes grow. Most teams know this intellectually, but executing it is another story entirely.
Without systematic maintenance, detection quality degrades silently. That carefully tuned rule from last year? It's now generating 50 false positives daily, training analysts to ignore alerts. Multiply this across hundreds of rules, and you understand why alert fatigue is epidemic.
The Time Thieves: Where Your Day Really Goes
Our research identified the top time-consuming tasks that plague detection teams:
Creating New Rules to Expand Coverage
Why it's hard: Without visibility into existing coverage, teams either duplicate effort or leave gaps. Rule creation becomes reactive rather than strategic.
Mapping and Understanding Coverage Gaps
Why it's hard: Coverage mapping requires correlating rules across platforms with framework techniques—a manual process that's outdated the moment it's complete.
Testing and Improving True Positive Performance
Why it's hard: Testing requires production-like data and systematic validation. Most teams test in production (when they test at all).
Manual Deployments Across Multiple Platforms
Why it's hard: Each platform has unique requirements. A simple logic change requires multiple translations and deployments.
The Three Perspectives: How Problems Compound
The detection management crisis impacts every level:
The CISO's Dilemma
"We are unable to measure and then articulate our threat coverage and detection effectiveness."
Without metrics, CISOs can't justify investments, demonstrate improvement, or provide board-level assurance. They're flying blind in a data-driven world.
The Detection Engineer's Frustration
"I lack tools to centrally manage and deploy detection rules across our attack surfaces."
Talented engineers spend 70% of their time on manual tasks instead of developing new capabilities. Job satisfaction plummets as operational overhead soars.
The SOC Analyst's Reality
"Noisy alerts impact our efficiency and effectiveness."
Poor detection quality creates alert fatigue. Analysts lose trust in detections, real threats hide in the noise, and burnout accelerates.
Breaking the Cycle: What Successful Teams Do Differently
The 25% of teams that excel at detection management share common characteristics:
First, they treat detections as code. Every piece of detection logic lives in version control with automated testing pipelines, code review processes, and rollback capabilities. No more "DetectionRules_final_v2.xlsx" floating around email.
Second, they measure everything. Detection performance metrics, coverage gap analysis, false positive tracking, and time-to-deployment stats guide every decision. They don't guess—they know.
Third, they automate relentlessly. API-driven deployments, automated translation between formats, continuous validation, and performance monitoring eliminate the manual overhead that drowns most teams.
Fourth, they think platform-first. Instead of managing each tool separately, they create a unified detection management layer that provides a single source of truth, consistent processes across tools, and integrated metrics and monitoring.
The Path Forward: From Struggle to Scale
The solution isn't working harder—it's working differently. Successful detection management requires:
First, you need to acknowledge that detection management isn't just a side effect of having security tools—it's a discipline requiring dedicated resources and tooling. Stop treating it as something that happens automatically when you deploy a SIEM.
Next, centralize your approach. Whether through platform adoption or process standardization, you need a single control plane for detection operations. The days of managing each tool in isolation are over if you want to scale.
Third, embrace engineering principles. Apply software development best practices to detection management because your detection content is code—treat it accordingly. Version control, testing, deployment pipelines, and monitoring aren't nice-to-haves; they're table stakes.
Finally, measure and iterate relentlessly. You can't improve what you don't measure, so implement metrics from day one and use them to drive every decision. False positive rates, coverage gaps, deployment velocity—if it matters to your program, it should have a number attached to it.
The Bottom Line
The fact that 75% of teams struggle with detection management isn't an indictment—it's an opportunity. The challenges are systemic, not individual. By acknowledging these challenges and adopting modern approaches, teams can transform detection operations from a source of frustration into a strategic advantage.
The question isn't whether you need better detection management—it's whether you'll act before the problem gets worse.
Ready to join the 25% who've solved detection management?
See how EchoTrail DRM can transform your detection operations from reactive to proactive.
Learn more about EchoTrail DRM →