Guest:

Topics:

You argue that declaring existing SIEM being obsolete is a "marketing slogan" rather than a true thesis. What is the real pain point and the actual gap in traditional SIEMs as opposed to the more sensational claims?
You highlight that "correlation, state, timelines, and real-time detection require locality," making centralization a necessary trade-off. Can a truly federated or decoupled SIEM architecture achieve the same fidelity and real-time performance for complex, stateful detections as a centralized one?
You call the rise of independent security data pipelines the "SIEM Trojan Horse." How quickly is this abstraction layer turning SIEM into a "swappable" component, and what should SIEM vendors have done differently years ago to prevent this market from existing?
This "AI SOC" thing, is this even real? Is AI in a SOC a better label? Do you think major SIEM vendors will own this very soon, like they did with UEBA and SOAR?
If volume-based pricing is flawed because it penalizes good security hygiene, what is a better SIEM pricing model that fairly addresses compute, enrichment, and retention costs without just shifting the volume cost to unpredictable query charges?
You question the idea that startups can find a better way to release detection rules than large vendors with significant content teams. What metrics should security leaders use to evaluate the quality of a vendor's detection engineering (DE) output beyond just coverage numbers? Can AI fix DE?

Resources:

Outro

The AI-powered Podcast Player