EDR vs. SIEM vs. SOAR: MonitorDog's Integrated Detection, Analysis, and Response
When organizations strengthen their security posture, three terms come up frequently: EDR, SIEM, and SOAR. All three contribute to threat detection and incident response, so they may appear similar. In practice, however, each observes a different scope and serves a different role.
In simple terms, EDR looks deeply into endpoints such as PCs and servers, SIEM brings security data from across the organization together for analysis, and SOAR connects and automates repetitive response procedures after a threat is detected.
MonitorDog integrates these three operating approaches within screen security. It detects security issues at the endpoint and takes immediate action, centrally manages events from multiple users and devices through a dashboard, and classifies suspicious activity or triggers responses such as screen locking according to administrator-defined scenarios.
3-Minute Summary
- EDR continuously monitors endpoint activity—including processes, files, and network connections—to detect, investigate, and contain threats.
- SIEM centrally collects and correlates logs from multiple security systems and infrastructure sources to reveal threats across the organization.
- Within screen security, MonitorDog brings endpoint detection and action, centralized dashboard management, and scenario-based automated response together in one platform.
What Is EDR?
EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) is a security solution focused on endpoints. It installs an agent or sensor on organization-managed devices such as employee laptops, desktops, and business servers, then continuously observes activity on those systems.
EDR typically collects information such as:
- Which processes were executed?
- Which files or registry entries were created or modified?
- Which IP addresses did the device communicate with?
- Which user account signed in?
- In what sequence were child processes launched?
For example, if a document application suddenly launches a command-line tool that begins encrypting large numbers of files, an EDR can identify that sequence as suspected ransomware activity. Security analysts can investigate the process chain, isolate the compromised endpoint from the network, or block the malicious file.
Antivirus software primarily aims to prevent known malware from entering a system. EDR goes further by using behavior to discover and investigate attacks that bypass preventive controls. Its main visibility, however, remains inside endpoints where its agent is installed. An EDR alone cannot easily provide a complete view of cloud services, firewalls, email, identity systems, and the rest of the organization.
What Is SIEM?
SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) centrally collects and analyzes logs and alerts generated by different systems, including firewalls, servers, cloud platforms, IAM, EDR, DLP, and business applications.
The core value of SIEM is not simply storing logs. It is connecting isolated events and turning them into a meaningful view of a threat.
Consider the following sequence:
- A specific account repeatedly fails to sign in from an overseas IP address.
- The same account successfully signs in shortly afterward.
- It accesses an unfamiliar server with administrator privileges.
- EDR raises an alert for a bulk compression utility.
Viewed separately, these records may look like routine authentication failures or normal program execution. SIEM can correlate the events using common attributes such as IP address, user, device, and time, then present them as a potential account compromise incident.
SIEM is strong in organization-wide visibility, long-term log search, detection-rule management, auditing, and compliance. But it cannot analyze events that were never collected. Missing log sources or improperly normalized fields will reduce detection quality. In the end, SIEM performance depends not only on the product but also heavily on the quality of log design and detection rules.
What Is SOAR?
SOAR (Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response) connects security tools and business systems and runs incident response procedures as playbooks.
If SIEM focuses on finding out "what happened," SOAR standardizes and automates the next question: "What should we do now?"
For example, when a phishing email is reported, a SOAR playbook might perform these steps in order:
- Extract the sender, URL, and attachment hash from the message.
- Check their reputation with threat intelligence services.
- If the message is malicious, search other users' inboxes for the same email.
- Ask a firewall or security gateway to block the malicious URL.
- Create a ticket and deliver the findings to the assigned analyst.
Orchestration connects the sequence of work across tools and people. Automation executes repeatable, clearly defined steps without human intervention. Not every response needs to be fully automated. High-impact actions, such as disabling an account or isolating a server, can require analyst approval before execution.
EDR, SIEM, and SOAR at a Glance
| Solution | Core role | Key capabilities and characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| EDR | Detect and respond to threats on endpoints | Collect process, file, network, and login activity; investigate threats; isolate devices; and block malicious files Strength: Deep visibility into individual endpoints Limitation: Limited visibility into unmanaged systems and external environments |
| SIEM | Centrally analyze security events across the organization | Collect and normalize logs from networks, clouds, endpoints, and identities; search and correlate events; generate alerts and dashboards Strength: Analyze distributed events in one place Limitation: Cannot analyze data that was never collected |
| SOAR | Connect and automate response procedures for detected incidents | Enrich and triage SIEM and EDR alerts with threat intelligence; run playbooks; create tickets; and automate response Strength: Handle repetitive work quickly and consistently Limitation: Requires well-defined procedures and tool integrations |
This table describes the central role of each product category. In the real market, their boundaries increasingly overlap. EDR products may offer automated actions such as device isolation, SIEM platforms may include playbooks and automation, and SOAR may be delivered as part of a SIEM platform.
Rather than relying on product labels, organizations should compare their actual requirements with the data each product collects, the detection and investigation capabilities it provides, and the extent to which it can automate response.
MonitorDog Through the EDR, SIEM, and SOAR Lens
Describing MonitorDog only as a tool that detects smartphone filming does not fully represent the security operations it performs. In the specialized areas of screen and endpoint security, MonitorDog connects detection and action, centralized analysis and management, and scenario-based response automation in one workflow.
EDR Lens: Detect and Act at the Endpoint
The MonitorDog agent observes a range of security events on user PCs, including screen filming attempts, multiple-person detection, absence from the seat, screenshot attempts, successful and failed facial authentication, blocked program execution, and device use.
Detection does not end with a log entry. Based on policy, MonitorDog can lock the screen to prevent further exposure. Administrators can then investigate the event time, affected user and device, and related history. This aligns with the functional EDR flow of continuously observing endpoint behavior and taking action at the point where a threat occurs.
SIEM Lens: Centrally Manage Events and Policies in the Dashboard
Security events from multiple users and devices are brought together in the MonitorDog administrator dashboard. Administrators can search organization-wide events and review risk levels, review status, user and device history, and related activity in one place.
Security policies can also be configured and managed centrally at the user and organization level. Instead of checking PCs one at a time, administrators can identify recurring events and high-risk users through the dashboard and manage the records needed for investigation and audit. This applies SIEM's role of centralizing and analyzing distributed events to the field of screen security.
SOAR Lens: Automate Response Procedures with Scenarios
MonitorDog's scenario feature connects individual events to security operations procedures. Administrators can configure scenarios that classify behavior as suspicious when specific events repeat within a short period or exceed a defined threshold.
The response level can be adjusted to match the scenario's risk and business context: record the event without locking, apply a lock that the user can release, or require administrator approval to unlock. Event Lock or Remote Lock can also be used to control an endpoint immediately when needed. Instead of manually reviewing and acting on every event, MonitorDog provides the functional SOAR approach of executing a consistent response based on predefined conditions and procedures.
| Lens | MonitorDog capabilities | Operational benefit |
|---|---|---|
| EDR | PC agent-based event detection, event investigation, screen locking, and endpoint action | Quickly detect and block threats at the affected endpoint |
| SIEM | Dashboard-based event collection and search, risk and review status management, and centralized policy management | Understand the security posture of multiple users and devices in one place |
| SOAR | Condition- and threshold-based scenarios, suspicious activity classification, and lock and approval procedures | Automate repetitive decisions and responses according to policy |
This does not mean that MonitorDog provides every capability of a general-purpose EDR, SIEM, or SOAR product. Existing security solutions continue to handle category-specific functions such as malware forensics and general-purpose ingestion of third-party security logs. MonitorDog's differentiator is that it connects all three functions within the specialized domain of screen security and endpoint control.
How Do the Three Solutions Work Together?
EDR, SIEM, and SOAR do not simply replace one another. Together, they form a security operations workflow.
1. EDR detects a threat on an endpoint.
An employee PC shows suspicious script execution, credential theft behavior, or communication with an external server. EDR includes the relevant process tree and file information in its alert.
2. SIEM adds context from other systems.
SIEM connects the EDR alert with authentication logs, email security logs, firewall records, and cloud access logs. It checks whether the same account showed abnormal activity on other devices and helps determine the scope of the incident.
3. SOAR executes the defined response procedure.
Low-impact tasks such as threat intelligence lookups, ticket creation, and analyst notification can run automatically. For a high-risk incident, SOAR can request analyst approval and, once approved, use EDR to isolate the endpoint or IAM to lock the account.
In short, EDR acts as a sensor and response mechanism in the field, SIEM serves as the central analysis hub, and SOAR functions as the execution engine for response procedures.
If You Can Adopt Only One, Which Comes First?
The answer depends on the organization's size and current security operations maturity. The following criteria can help set priorities.
Choose EDR First When Ransomware and Endpoint Compromise Are the Most Urgent Risks
EDR should come first when an organization needs to quickly detect and investigate attacks on employee PCs and servers. To be effective, the organization also needs visibility into its managed-device inventory and personnel who can review alerts and perform isolation actions.
Choose SIEM When Logs Are Scattered Across Multiple Security Tools
SIEM provides significant value when an organization already operates firewalls, cloud platforms, identity systems, EDR, and other solutions but must check each console separately. It is also appropriate when long-term log search is needed for investigations or centralized retention is important for regulatory compliance.
Choose SOAR When Response Procedures Are Established but Repetitive Work Has Become a Bottleneck
SOAR is most effective when sufficient alert sources and stable response procedures already exist. If the organization has not yet defined who checks each alert, what they inspect, and under which conditions they block something, it should establish the process before automating it. Automating an undefined process only repeats incorrect actions faster.
Small and midsize organizations do not necessarily need to purchase three separate products. They can first assess the SIEM and automation capabilities already included in an existing EDR or cloud security platform, then expand gradually according to their actual staff and log volume.
Pre-Adoption Checklist
1. Inventory Protected Assets and Log Sources
Identify how many PCs and servers are managed, which cloud and business systems are in use, and which logs are currently retained. Buying a tool before identifying the data can increase licensing and storage costs without improving visibility.
2. Define Owners and Procedures for Post-Detection Response
Decide who reviews alerts, how incidents are classified, and when device isolation or account locking should occur. Tools can generate alerts, but they cannot replace final accountability or business context.
3. Set Automation Boundaries According to Risk
Threat intelligence lookups, duplicate-alert cleanup, and ticket creation are relatively safe to automate. Account deactivation, network blocking, and server isolation can disrupt business operations, so approval stages and recovery procedures should be designed alongside them.
4. Calculate Ongoing Costs and Staffing
SIEM cost is directly affected by log ingestion volume and retention periods. EDR policy tuning, SIEM detection-rule management, and SOAR playbook maintenance also require staff time. Evaluate ongoing operating costs as well as initial acquisition costs.
5. Identify What Cannot Be Detected
No security tool can see every threat. EDR relies on activity inside managed endpoints, SIEM relies on collected logs, and SOAR relies on incoming alerts and defined procedures. Behavior that never creates a digital event cannot enter this workflow.
Bringing Behavior in Front of the Screen into the Detection, Analysis, and Response Workflow
Consider someone displaying sensitive customer information or a design drawing on a screen and photographing it with a personal smartphone. The company PC creates no new process or file, and no network transfer occurs.
Ordinary endpoint logs contain no activity to investigate, the central analytics system has no source event to collect, and the automated response system has no alert to trigger it. This is not a failure of the existing tools. It happens because the physical behavior occurs outside their field of observation.
MonitorDog turns physical situations in front of the screen into detectable security events. It detects a smartphone filming attempt at the endpoint and takes the necessary action, brings the event into a central dashboard for analysis, and applies suspicious activity classification and locking procedures according to configured scenarios.
In other words, MonitorDog's screen-security-focused EDR, SIEM, and SOAR capabilities bring behavior that previously left no logs into an operational workflow of detection → centralized analysis → automated response. Where integration with the existing security stack is supported, these screen security events can also be analyzed alongside other identity and endpoint logs and connected to organizational response procedures.
Conclusion
The differences among EDR, SIEM, and SOAR become clear when they are understood by their roles in security operations rather than by product names.
- EDR: Detects, investigates, and responds to threats on endpoints.
- SIEM: Brings organization-wide security data together to analyze incident context and scope.
- SOAR: Connects and automates repetitive response procedures after detection.
The goal should not be to deploy all three product categories for their own sake. Start by defining which threats the organization cannot currently see, who handles alerts, and which responses can be automated. Physical threats such as screen filming, which leave no ordinary digital logs, must also be considered to reduce real security blind spots.
Within screen security, MonitorDog connects these three roles in one platform. It identifies security issues and takes action at endpoints, centrally manages organization-wide events and policies through a dashboard, and uses scenarios to automate suspicious activity classification and response procedures.
To see how MonitorDog's integrated detection, analysis, and response workflow operates in a real work environment, request a free demo.
References
Related Contents
Browse All Contents
Browse
