Monitoring & Detection · MD-Q04

Question: Are alerts triaged, investigated, and closed through a documented workflow with evidence, ownership, and timelines?

Why This Matters

Even strong detections fail without disciplined triage. A repeatable workflow shortens response time and preserves audit-grade evidence.

Maturity

0 — Unaware
Alerts sit in consoles; no ownership.
1 — Ad Hoc
Engineers “pick up” alerts; results not recorded.
2 — Defined
Triage SOP exists with severity, SLA, and assignments.
3 — Managed
Case management, evidence capture, and metrics in place.
4 — Integrated
SOAR automations for enrichment/containment; handoffs to IR.
5 — Optimized
Continuous improvement loop using RCA and KPI trends.

How to Level Up

From → To Actions
0 → 1 Assign an on-call and define simple severity levels.
1 → 2 Publish triage SOP with SLA and evidence checklist.
2 → 3 Adopt case management; require minimal fields for closure.
3 → 4 Automate enrichment and common response steps (block IP, isolate host).
4 → 5 Run monthly RCA review and adjust rules/SOP accordingly.

Enablers

Evidence

KPIs

Low-Cost / Open-Source Options (MSME)

Purpose Tool Notes
Case management TheHive / Cortex Free IR workflow with integrations.
SOAR lite Shuffle / n8n Automate enrichment and common actions.
Evidence WORM-capable store (MinIO versioning) Immutable artifacts.

Common Pitfalls

Compliance Mapping

Standard Clauses / Notes
ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.5.24 (Incident management), A.8.16
CERT-In 2022 Incident reporting/handling timelines
DPDP Act 2023 Breach notification duties (where applicable)
NIST CSF 2.0 DE.AE / RS.MI / RC.MI
NIRMATA Mapping MD-Q04 proves operational discipline in SOC.