{"id":889,"date":"2026-05-12T12:41:45","date_gmt":"2026-05-12T12:41:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thedigitalfortress.us\/?p=889"},"modified":"2026-05-12T12:41:45","modified_gmt":"2026-05-12T12:41:45","slug":"webinar-what-the-riskiest-soc-alerts-go-unanswered","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thedigitalfortress.us\/?p=889","title":{"rendered":"Webinar: What the Riskiest SOC Alerts Go Unanswered"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\ue804<\/i>The Hacker News<\/span>\ue802<\/i>May 12, 2026<\/span><\/span>Threat Detection \/ AI Security<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
<\/a><\/div>\n

Why do the Riskiest SOC Alerts Go Unanswered?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Security operations teams are drowning in alerts. But the real problem isn’t always alert volume; it’s the blind spots. The most dangerous alerts are the ones no one is investigating.<\/p>\n

A recent report from The Hacker News examined why certain high-risk alert categories – WAF, DLP, OT\/IoT, dark web intelligence, and supply chain signals- consistently go uninvestigated across enterprise SOCs. The findings point to a structural gap in how security coverage is delivered today: not a lack of tooling, but a ceiling built into every existing model.<\/p>\n

Your SOC Model Has a Coverage Ceiling<\/strong><\/h2>\n

In-house SOC teams are the first to feel the gap. Overloaded with high-volume, routine alerts, analysts rarely have the capacity, or the specialized expertise, to investigate WAF events, DLP anomalies, or signals from operational technology environments. These alert types require deep, domain-specific knowledge that most SOC teams simply don’t have on staff.<\/p>\n

MSSPs and MDRs face a different version of the same problem. Complex, specialized alerts are time-consuming to investigate and require business context that managed providers don’t have. The economics don’t work in their favor, so they escalate these alerts back to the client, the same in-house team that lacked the capacity to investigate them in the first place.<\/p>\n

AI SOC automation platforms have made significant progress on common alert types, but most cap out at four to six pre-defined categories. They rely on static, pre-built triage logic. When an alert falls outside that logic, whether it’s a novel threat, an unfamiliar alert source, or an emerging attack vector, the platform deprioritizes it or passes it on.<\/p>\n

The result is a blind spot at the intersection of all existing SOC models: the alerts most likely to result in a breach are precisely the ones for which no one has a workflow to handle.<\/p>\n

Who Offers True Coverage<\/strong><\/h2>\n

On May 21, 2026, Radiant Security<\/a> and German cybersecurity firm Cirosec are hosting a technical webinar to address this gap directly: \u00abAlert Coverage No One Else Can Triage.\u00bb<\/strong><\/p>\n

The session will examine the structural reasons behind the coverage ceiling, walk through the specific alert types most commonly left uninvestigated, and demo live how Radiant’s AI SOC platform triages them.<\/p>\n

Radiant is built on a fundamentally different architecture than other AI SOC platforms. Rather than relying on pre-built playbooks, its AI generates custom triage logic on the fly, for any alert type, including ones the platform has never seen before.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Webinar Details<\/strong><\/h2>\n