Start from a neutral baseline and add what matters to you. Criteria are labeled by source — the platform baseline is architecture-neutral; buyer-contributed criteria are shown separately.
Build your evaluation
no account needed
Match on your requirements
no account needed
This evaluation is stored in your browser only. We cannot see it, and it is not tied to any account. Save it to a link or create an account to keep it across devices — you can export it at any time either way.
1. Weight what matters
20 criteria
baselineWhat behavioral baseline methodology does the platform use to detect anomalous insider activity — per-user/per-peer-group baselining, and how long does it take after deployment to establish a reliable baseline before alerts become trustworthy?
baselineDescribe data-exfiltration detection specifically — unusual bulk downloads, off-hours access to sensitive repositories, USB/cloud-upload activity spikes preceding a resignation — with a customer-referenced real-world detection example.
baselineHow does the platform balance privacy and employee monitoring — is monitoring risk-triggered/scoped versus blanket surveillance of all employees, and what employee-facing transparency or legal/HR review process does the vendor recommend?
baselineWhat data sources feed the insider-threat model — DLP events, identity/access logs, HR system signals (e.g., resignation, PIP status), endpoint activity, email/chat content — and which of these require separate licensing or integration work?
baselineDetail case management and investigation workflow — when an alert fires, what evidence is automatically compiled for an investigator, and is there a legally defensible chain-of-custody for evidence that might support termination or legal action?
baselineHow does the platform distinguish malicious insider activity from negligent/accidental risk (e.g., misconfigured sharing settings) versus a genuinely compromised account behaving like an insider threat?
baselineExplain third-party and contractor coverage — does the model extend to non-employee accounts with system access (contractors, vendors, service accounts), which often have less oversight than full-time employees?
baselineWhat is the alert volume and precision in practice — roughly how many actionable alerts per week should a security team of our size expect, and what tuning controls exist to keep the program sustainable rather than generating alert fatigue?
baselineWhat is the pricing model — per employee monitored, per data source integrated, or a flat enterprise tier — and how does cost scale as monitoring coverage expands to more data sources and a growing workforce?
baselineWhat legal/compliance review process does the vendor recommend before deploying employee monitoring, particularly for jurisdictions with strict labor-law requirements around employee surveillance (e.g., EU works-council consultation requirements), and can they provide guidance materials or legal-review templates?
baselineDoes the platform verify that a departed employee's access was actually and completely revoked post-termination (cross-referencing offboarding actions against continued access attempts), distinct from pre-termination resignation-period risk scoring?
baselineWho within the security/HR organization gets access to insider-threat findings, and is there a strict, documented role-based access model given how sensitive and potentially career-affecting this monitoring data is for the individuals involved?
baselineWhat is the measured false-positive rate in practice, and what is the vendor's guidance on managing the real employee-trust and morale impact of a false accusation before it's corrected, given the severity of being wrongly flagged as a potential insider threat?
baselineOnce a confirmed malicious insider is identified, what is the platform's support for the handoff to HR, Legal, and potentially law enforcement — does it produce a legally defensible evidence package suitable for a real termination or legal proceeding, and has this been tested in an actual case?
baselineHow does the platform's monitoring approach adapt for international deployments where employee-monitoring laws vary significantly by country — can monitoring scope and intensity be configured per-jurisdiction, or is there only one global monitoring policy?
baselineDetail historical trend reporting on program effectiveness (confirmed-incident count, false-positive rate trend, alert-volume trend) over time, suitable for demonstrating to leadership that the program is sustainable and delivering real value, not just generating noise.
baselineSubmit the vendor's insider threat program (per NIST 800-53 controls PM-12, IR-4(6), IR-4(7), SI-4(12)) to the organization's Chief Privacy Officer and CISO within 90 days of contract effective date.
baselineThe Solution should detect threats from various attack vectors (malware, web application attacks, network attacks, watering hole attacks, DNS attacks, insider threat, data exfiltration) using machine learning across a minimum set of sources: Netflow, IPS/IDS, Proxy, WAF, Windows logs, DNS, FW.
baselineProvide user behaviour analysis to identify potential internal and external threats; assist the Bank's active participation in cyber drills conducted under CERT-In/IDRBT; coordinate with internal/external contact groups to monitor, analyze and escalate security incidents, developing protect/detect/respond/recover capability for cyber-attacks.
baselineDo you restrict and monitor your employee access to data 24x7?
Signing up adds sharing with your team, sending this as an RFP to vendors, and private document sharing. Nothing above is taken away, and nothing here is sent anywhere until you choose to.
Platform baseline
neutral · staff-reviewed
RFIWhat behavioral baseline methodology does the platform use to detect anomalous insider activity — per-user/per-peer-group baselining, and how long does it take after deployment to establish a reliable baseline before alerts become trustworthy?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Look for a stated baselining period and peer-group comparison (not just absolute thresholds) — alerts fired before a reliable baseline exists are mostly noise.
RFPDescribe data-exfiltration detection specifically — unusual bulk downloads, off-hours access to sensitive repositories, USB/cloud-upload activity spikes preceding a resignation — with a customer-referenced real-world detection example.Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Pre-departure data exfiltration is the classic insider-threat scenario; look for a described detection pattern and a real customer example, not a generic 'anomaly detection' claim.
RFIHow does the platform balance privacy and employee monitoring — is monitoring risk-triggered/scoped versus blanket surveillance of all employees, and what employee-facing transparency or legal/HR review process does the vendor recommend?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Blanket surveillance creates legal and cultural risk in many jurisdictions; look for risk-based, scoped monitoring and vendor guidance on legal/HR involvement, not a product that assumes unrestricted monitoring is acceptable everywhere.
RFIWhat data sources feed the insider-threat model — DLP events, identity/access logs, HR system signals (e.g., resignation, PIP status), endpoint activity, email/chat content — and which of these require separate licensing or integration work?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
HR-signal integration (flight risk indicators) is a differentiator many products lack; look for a real integration list and clarity on what requires additional licensing.
RFPDetail case management and investigation workflow — when an alert fires, what evidence is automatically compiled for an investigator, and is there a legally defensible chain-of-custody for evidence that might support termination or legal action?
From other buyers
crowdsourced · anonymized
💬
No buyer-contributed criteria yet
Verified buyers can suggest criteria (anonymized before pooling).
Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Insider-threat findings often lead to HR/legal action — look for defensible evidence handling (chain of custody, tamper-evident logging), not just a dashboard alert with no investigation support.
RFIHow does the platform distinguish malicious insider activity from negligent/accidental risk (e.g., misconfigured sharing settings) versus a genuinely compromised account behaving like an insider threat?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
These three scenarios need different responses; look for the platform explicitly differentiating intent/cause rather than treating all anomalies identically.
RFPExplain third-party and contractor coverage — does the model extend to non-employee accounts with system access (contractors, vendors, service accounts), which often have less oversight than full-time employees?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Contractors and service accounts are a common blind spot with real incident history — look for explicit coverage, not an employee-only model.
RFIWhat is the alert volume and precision in practice — roughly how many actionable alerts per week should a security team of our size expect, and what tuning controls exist to keep the program sustainable rather than generating alert fatigue?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Insider-threat programs commonly fail from alert fatigue; look for a realistic volume expectation and real tuning controls, not an implicit assumption of unlimited analyst capacity.
RFIWhat is the pricing model — per employee monitored, per data source integrated, or a flat enterprise tier — and how does cost scale as monitoring coverage expands to more data sources and a growing workforce?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Look for transparent, predictable scaling economics; a vendor unable to project cost at meaningfully broader monitoring scope creates real budget risk.
RFPWhat legal/compliance review process does the vendor recommend before deploying employee monitoring, particularly for jurisdictions with strict labor-law requirements around employee surveillance (e.g., EU works-council consultation requirements), and can they provide guidance materials or legal-review templates?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Employee monitoring has real, jurisdiction-specific legal requirements — a vendor with mature deployment experience should offer concrete guidance materials, not leave the customer to figure out legal compliance entirely on their own.
RFIDoes the platform verify that a departed employee's access was actually and completely revoked post-termination (cross-referencing offboarding actions against continued access attempts), distinct from pre-termination resignation-period risk scoring?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Post-termination access-revocation verification is a distinct, valuable capability from pre-termination risk scoring — ask for a specific answer on whether the platform closes this loop rather than only watching for risk signals before departure.
RFIWho within the security/HR organization gets access to insider-threat findings, and is there a strict, documented role-based access model given how sensitive and potentially career-affecting this monitoring data is for the individuals involved?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Insider-threat findings are uniquely sensitive personal data with real employment consequences — ask for a specific, strict access-control model, not just a general RBAC claim.
RFPWhat is the measured false-positive rate in practice, and what is the vendor's guidance on managing the real employee-trust and morale impact of a false accusation before it's corrected, given the severity of being wrongly flagged as a potential insider threat?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
A false positive here has real human consequences beyond typical security-tool false positives — ask for both a real accuracy figure and specific guidance on managing the human impact of an incorrect flag.
RFIOnce a confirmed malicious insider is identified, what is the platform's support for the handoff to HR, Legal, and potentially law enforcement — does it produce a legally defensible evidence package suitable for a real termination or legal proceeding, and has this been tested in an actual case?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Ask for a real case example where the evidence package was actually used in a termination or legal proceeding, not just a theoretical claim of 'legally defensible' evidence.
RFIHow does the platform's monitoring approach adapt for international deployments where employee-monitoring laws vary significantly by country — can monitoring scope and intensity be configured per-jurisdiction, or is there only one global monitoring policy?Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Employee-monitoring legality varies substantially by country — a vendor should support genuine per-jurisdiction policy configuration, not force one global monitoring posture that may be illegal in some regions.
RFPDetail historical trend reporting on program effectiveness (confirmed-incident count, false-positive rate trend, alert-volume trend) over time, suitable for demonstrating to leadership that the program is sustainable and delivering real value, not just generating noise.Answer key — what a strong answer shows
Trend-over-time program-effectiveness reporting is a distinct capability from individual alert investigation — confirm this exists as a maintained, exportable report.
RFPSubmit the vendor's insider threat program (per NIST 800-53 controls PM-12, IR-4(6), IR-4(7), SI-4(12)) to the organization's Chief Privacy Officer and CISO within 90 days of contract effective date.
RFPThe Solution should detect threats from various attack vectors (malware, web application attacks, network attacks, watering hole attacks, DNS attacks, insider threat, data exfiltration) using machine learning across a minimum set of sources: Netflow, IPS/IDS, Proxy, WAF, Windows logs, DNS, FW.
RFPProvide user behaviour analysis to identify potential internal and external threats; assist the Bank's active participation in cyber drills conducted under CERT-In/IDRBT; coordinate with internal/external contact groups to monitor, analyze and escalate security incidents, developing protect/detect/respond/recover capability for cyber-attacks.
RFPDo you restrict and monitor your employee access to data 24x7?
