Is a Microsoft-only cybersecurity strategy putting your organisation at risk?

For many businesses, Microsoft is already the backbone of their operations, providing email, cloud storage, and collaboration tools. It’s no surprise, then, that when considering cybersecurity, many organisations lean toward Microsoft’s solutions. By consolidating everything under one provider, you reduce the number of agents and tools required, which simplifies management and potentially cuts costs. In fact, with many companies already invested in Microsoft 365, it seems like a no-brainer to extend this to cybersecurity.

With Microsoft’s widespread use, it makes sense that security teams would explore its built-in tools like Defender for Endpoint, Azure Active Directory, and Cloud App Security. These solutions promise reduced complexity and easy integration with existing workflows. But does that tell the whole story?

The hidden costs and fragmentation

While Microsoft’s licensing might seem cost-effective at first, there’s growing concern about hidden costs. UK security professionals have noted that while the pricing might be attractive upfront, Microsoft’s historical pricing strategies suggest these costs could increase over time.

Another issue is the fragmented nature of Microsoft’s cybersecurity services. Though Microsoft offers comprehensive tools, the user experience often falls short. As noted in our webinar, the administrative interfaces for managing security are not unified, making management more complex than expected. With different portals and dashboards, security teams could be spending more time managing tools than securing systems. In a time when security teams are shrinking, this administrative overhead is the last thing they need.

Implementation matters: License alone won’t protect you

One of the critical takeaways from the webinar was the emphasis on implementation. Simply having a Microsoft license doesn’t guarantee protection. To truly secure your systems, these tools need to be properly configured and integrated into your security framework. And with the complexities of Microsoft’s systems, this can require significant expertise and resources. Without a deep understanding of the intricacies of Microsoft’s security features, businesses could be leaving themselves vulnerable, thinking they’re protected when they’re not.

Human error or poor implementation of security measures remain the leading cause of breaches, not necessarily the tools themselves. Even the most advanced cybersecurity tool is useless if it’s not implemented correctly.

Exploring alternatives: Tailored cybersecurity solutions

While Microsoft offers a broad range of tools, their solutions can feel like a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Non-Microsoft alternatives, like integrated, best-of-breed cybersecurity solutions, provide specialised tools that cater to specific needs. For instance, many UK-based cybersecurity providers offer more tailored and responsive support, particularly for industries like healthcare, finance, and the public sector, where data privacy and compliance are paramount.

The key value of choosing alternative providers lies in the dedicated customer support and flexibility they offer. Where Microsoft might have a rigid service model, smaller vendors can be more responsive and proactive in adapting to your evolving needs. For shrinking security teams, having that extra support can make all the difference.

The future of cybersecurity: Efficiency and automation

With cyber threats growing and security teams shrinking, organisations are increasingly looking toward automation. Automated threat detection and response systems are critical to maintaining security without overburdening your team. Microsoft does offer some level of automation with tools like Sentinel and Defender, but again, these tools often require a high level of configuration to work effectively.

According to the UK Government’s 2024 Cyber Security Breaches Survey, 50% of UK businesses experienced a cyber attack or security breach in the last year, up from 39% in 2022 – it’s clear that security teams can no longer afford to manually handle every alert. The need for efficiency, automation, and integrated solutions will only grow as threats become more sophisticated.

Critical considerations for your security stack

Before deciding on a Microsoft-only strategy, it’s essential to weigh the pros and cons. Yes, Microsoft offers convenience and cost savings, but those benefits may be short-lived if hidden costs, implementation challenges, and administrative burdens pile up. Consider these questions:

• Is your team equipped to implement and manage Microsoft’s tools effectively?
• Have you considered the long-term costs, especially as Microsoft continues to expand its market share?
• What are the long-term complexity issues of having a Microsoft-only security solution?

If you’re unsure, it might be time to explore a hybrid approach that incorporates the strengths of Microsoft alongside specialised tools and providers that can fill in the gaps.

Final thoughts: Take control of your cybersecurity future

In the face of downsized security teams and expanding cyber threats, relying on a single provider might seem appealing, but it’s not without risks. Taking the time to evaluate your options and ensure that your cybersecurity strategy is tailored to your specific needs could save you from hidden costs, unnecessary complexity, and vulnerabilities down the road.