deception vs edr Piergiorgio Venuti

Deception vs EDR: What’s the Best Threat Defense Strategy?

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

Introduction

Cybersecurity is a daily challenge for businesses, with threats constantly evolving. Two approaches that are emerging to strengthen your security posture are Deception technology and Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools. But what are the differences and advantages of each? This article compares Deception and EDR to help choose the best strategy.

What is Deception Technology?

Deception technology uses deceptive security traps to identify and fool attackers. Dummy assets such as fake endpoints, documents, credentials, and network traffic are created to confuse hackers and divert them from valuable resources.

Key benefits include:

  • Early detection of threats – traps attract attackers and generate alerts as soon as there is an intrusion.
  • Active deception – confuse and slow down hackers by redirecting them to fake assets.
  • Fewer false positives – only unauthorized access triggers alerts.
  • Threat intelligence – gain valuable insight into attacker tactics and techniques.

Deception solutions are effective against a wide range of internal and external threats.

What is Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)?

EDR tools are focused on detecting and responding to endpoint threats. They use agents installed on laptops, servers, IoT devices and other endpoints to monitor suspicious events and activities.

The main advantages include:

  • Endpoint visibility – EDR agents provide real-time telemetry about processes, network connections, and anomalous behavior.
  • Advanced detection – behavioral analysis, machine learning and signatures to detect attacks never seen before.
  • Responsiveness – EDR tools allow you to contain threats, isolate compromised devices and initiate remediation actions.
  • Threat hunting – ability to search for threats at scale across all endpoints.

EDRs are effective against malware, targeted attacks, and insider threats.

Comparison between Deception and EDR

While both technologies aim to strengthen security, they have complementary approaches with different strengths:

DeceptionEDR
Deceptive traps activePassive monitoring of endpoints
Early intrusion detectionVisibility into suspicious activity
Identify the attackers’ tacticsThreat blocking and containment
Few false positivesDetection of unknown malware
Effective against external threatsEffective against malware and internal intrusions

In summary, Deception technology focuses on deception and initial intrusion detection, while EDR provides visibility, detection and responsiveness on endpoints.

How Deception and EDR work

Let’s dive into the specific actions Deception technology and EDR tools take to counter threats:

Deception Actions:

  • It generates fake data such as documents, credentials and network traffic to attract hackers
  • Create fake endpoints and servers to confuse attackers
  • Isolate and analyze malware targeting deceptive traps
  • Provides instant alerts as soon as fake credentials are used or traps are triggered
  • Track attackers’ lateral movement across the network with false hop points
  • Acquire threat intelligence about adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures

EDR actions:

  • Agents monitor filesystems, processes, network connections, and logs on each endpoint in real time
  • Detect exploits, lateral movement, and threat persistence techniques
  • Use machine learning to identify anomalous activities and processes
  • Automatically block and isolate compromised devices
  • Fornisce capacità di threat hunting per cercare proattivamente le intrusioni
  • It allows you to analyze and contain an attack in progress
  • Generate incident alerts and automate security responses

In summary, Deception lures and tricks attackers, while EDR detects and blocks infiltrating threats.

Conclusion

Deception technology and EDR tools are both invaluable in strengthening the security of organizations against today’s threats.

Deception provides early intrusion detection and the advantage of active deception, while EDR provides endpoint-level visibility, detection, and response capabilities. By integrating them together, you get unmatched active “on and off” network defense protection.

In fact, by combining Secure Online Desktop’s Active Defense Deception service with their SOCaaS EDR solutions, you can cover the corporate perimeter and critical endpoints with deceptive traps and real-time threat detection.

This multi-layered approach to active cyber defense helps identify and stop attacks in their early stages, dramatically reducing the risk of security breaches.

Useful links:

Share


RSS

More Articles…

Categories …

Tags

RSS darkreading

RSS Full Disclosure

  • Some SIM / USIM card security (and ecosystem) info October 4, 2024
    Posted by Security Explorations on Oct 04Hello All, Those interested in SIM / USIM card security might find some information at our spin-off project page dedicated to the topic potentially useful: https://security-explorations.com/sim-usim-cards.html We share there some information based on the experiences gained in the SIM / USIM card security space, all in a hope this […]
  • SEC Consult SA-20240930-0 :: Local Privilege Escalation via MSI Installer in Nitro PDF Pro (CVE-2024-35288) October 1, 2024
    Posted by SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab via Fulldisclosure on Sep 30>
  • Backdoor.Win32.Benju.a / Unauthenticated Remote Command Execution September 29, 2024
    Posted by malvuln on Sep 28Discovery / credits: Malvuln (John Page aka hyp3rlinx) (c) 2024 Original source: https://malvuln.com/advisory/88922242e8805bfbc5981e55fdfadd71.txt Contact: malvuln13 () gmail com Media: x.com/malvuln Threat: Backdoor.Win32.Benju.a Vulnerability: Unauthenticated Remote Command Execution Family: Benju Type: PE32 MD5: 88922242e8805bfbc5981e55fdfadd71 SHA256: 7d34804173e09d0f378dfc8c9212fe77ff51f08c9d0b73d00a19b7045ddc1f0e Vuln ID: MVID-2024-0700...
  • Backdoor.Win32.Prorat.jz / Remote Stack Buffer Overflow (SEH) September 29, 2024
    Posted by malvuln on Sep 28Discovery / credits: Malvuln (John Page aka hyp3rlinx) (c) 2024 Original source: https://malvuln.com/advisory/277f9a4db328476300c4da5f680902ea.txt Contact: malvuln13 () gmail com Media: x.com/malvuln Threat: Backdoor.Win32.Prorat.jz Vulnerability: Remote Stack Buffer Overflow (SEH) Description: The RAT listens on TCP ports 51100,5112,5110 and runs an FTP service. Prorat uses a vulnerable component in a secondary malware […]
  • Backdoor.Win32.Amatu.a / Remote Arbitrary File Write (RCE) September 29, 2024
    Posted by malvuln on Sep 28Discovery / credits: Malvuln (John Page aka hyp3rlinx) (c) 2024 Original source: https://malvuln.com/advisory/1e2d0b90ffc23e00b743c41064bdcc6b.txt Contact: malvuln13 () gmail com Media: x.com/malvuln Threat: Backdoor.Win32.Amatu.a Vulnerability: Remote Arbitrary File Write (RCE) Family: Amatu Type: PE32 MD5: 1e2d0b90ffc23e00b743c41064bdcc6b SHA256: 77fff9931013ab4de6d4be66ca4fda47be37b6f706a7062430ee8133c7521297 Vuln ID: MVID-2024-0698 Dropped...
  • Backdoor.Win32.Agent.pw / Remote Stack Buffer Overflow (SEH) September 29, 2024
    Posted by malvuln on Sep 28Discovery / credits: Malvuln (John Page aka hyp3rlinx) (c) 2024 Original source: https://malvuln.com/advisory/68dd7df213674e096d6ee255a7b90088.txt Contact: malvuln13 () gmail com Media: x.com/malvuln Threat: Backdoor.Win32.Agent.pw Vulnerability: Remote Stack Buffer Overflow (SEH) Description: The malware listens on TCP port 21111. Third-party attackers who can reach an infected machine can send specially crafted sequential packetz […]
  • Backdoor.Win32.Boiling / Remote Command Execution September 29, 2024
    Posted by malvuln on Sep 28Discovery / credits: Malvuln (John Page aka hyp3rlinx) (c) 2024 Original source: https://malvuln.com/advisory/80cb490e5d3c4205434850eff6ef5f8f.txt Contact: malvuln13 () gmail com Media: x.com/malvuln Threat: Backdoor.Win32.Boiling Vulnerability: Unauthenticated Remote Command Execution Description: The malware listens on TCP port 4369. Third party adversaries who can reach an infected host, can issue single OS commands to […]
  • Defense in depth -- the Microsoft way (part 88): a SINGLE command line shows about 20, 000 instances of CWE-73 September 29, 2024
    Posted by Stefan Kanthak on Sep 28Hi @ll, CWE-73: External Control of File Name or Path is a well-known and well-documented weakness. as well as demonstrate how to (ab)use just one instance of this weakness (introduced about 7 years ago with Microsoft Defender, so-called "security software") due to...
  • SEC Consult SA-20240925-0 :: Uninstall Password Bypass in BlackBerry CylanceOPTICS Windows Installer Package (CVE-2024-35214) September 29, 2024
    Posted by SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab via Fulldisclosure on Sep 28SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab Security Advisory < 20240925-0 > ======================================================================= title: Uninstall Password Bypass product: BlackBerry CylanceOPTICS Windows Installer Package vulnerable version: CylanceOPTICS
  • Apple iOS 17.2.1 - Screen Time Passcode Retrieval (Mitigation Bypass) September 29, 2024
    Posted by Patrick via Fulldisclosure on Sep 28Document Title: =============== Apple iOS 17.2.1 - Screen Time Passcode Retrieval (Mitigation Bypass) Release Date: ============= 2024-09-24 Affected Product(s): ==================== Vendor: Apple Inc. Product: Apple iOS 17.2.1 (possibly all < 18.0 excluding 18.0) References: ==================== VIDEO PoC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVvk9TR7qMo The vulnerability has been patched in the latest release of […]

Customers

Newsletter

{subscription_form_1}