Detection-First SIEM: Rule Types, Dashboards, and Strategic Visibility

“You can collect all the logs in the world, but if you can’t detect, you’re just archiving risk.”

Modern SIEMs aren’t just log aggregators—they are the analytical backbone of security operations. But to unlock their value, you need more than ingestion and alerts. You need detection-first thinking.

This post outlines the real strategy behind detection-first SIEM design: rule engineering, cross-correlation, anomaly detection, dashboarding, and threat-informed use cases. Whether you use Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Elastic, or Chronicle, the principles apply.

Detection Rule Types: Architecting for Context

Scheduled Rules

Run periodically using structured queries. These are the foundation of most SIEMs. Ideal for repeatable patterns like brute force, failed logins, suspicious parent-child process chains.

Example: In Splunk, a scheduled correlation search using Windows logs (4688 + 4689) to detect suspicious PowerShell spawn chains.

Near-Real-Time (NRT) / Streaming Rules

Triggered upon data arrival, designed for speed. Best for critical changes: privilege escalation, unusual access, high-risk alerts from endpoint tools.

Chronicle supports streaming detections using its UDM model. Splunk can use real-time alerts for similar cases.

Anomaly-Based Rules

Don’t rely on UEBA buzzwords. True anomaly detection starts with profiling your own normal.

In Splunk: build a dashboard showing average daily network traffic per asset over 30 days. Alert when current volume exceeds 3x the baseline.

In Sentinel: use KQL to compare a user’s authentication patterns this week vs. the last 30 days.

This isn’t AI—it’s behavioral profiling using data you already have.

Cross-Correlation Rules

The real depth of detection. Combine multiple telemetry sources to tell a story.

Example: DNS request to known C2 domain + unusual PowerShell command + rare parent process = likely beaconing behavior.

Requires good normalization (CIM, ASIM, UDM) and thoughtful data modeling.

Threat Intel & Fusion Rules

Auto-match IOCs or build multi-stage correlations. Sentinel’s Fusion, Splunk’s TIF, and Chronicle’s TI integrations play here. Good for:

Surfacing active attacker infrastructure
Grouping alerts into incidents

Dashboards: Visibility Is Architecture

Dashboards aren’t decoration—they are operational control surfaces.

What should a good dashboard show?

Alert volume trends by rule type and severity
MITRE ATT&CK heatmaps by data source or tactic
Log pipeline health (ingestion gaps, parser errors)
Threat intel hits by type, asset, geography
SOC KPIs: MTTR, MTTD, true positive rates

SIEM Platform Comparison

Feature	Splunk	Sentinel	Elastic	Chronicle
Custom Dashboards	⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐
MITRE Visualizations	⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐
Threat Intel Views	⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐
Flexibility & Drilldowns	⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐⭐⭐	⭐⭐

Splunk is still the most powerful for dashboarding—but it demands SPL skills and governance.

Threat-Informed Detection Engineering

Your use cases should not be built from guesswork. They should come from:

MITRE ATT&CK mappings
Threat intel reports
Purple teaming & emulation outcomes
Real attack chains

Don’t alert on “rare command” — detect T1059.001 in the context of a real user and a real sequence.

Build rules that reflect how attackers think, not just how logs behave.

Threat Hunting: Proactive Intelligence, Not Passive Alerting

Threat hunting is hypothesis-driven exploration:

What doesn’t look right?
What shouldn’t be here today?

Every hunt can result in:

New dashboards
New detections
Enriched context for triage

Use the SIEM to test ideas, not just to react. Good hunters generate reusable knowledge.

Final Word

Your SIEM is not your strategy. Your detection logic is.

Design rules that reflect reality
Build dashboards that expose gaps
Hunt for signals before they become alerts
Use threat intel to shape—not drown—your visibility

If you’re not intentional, you’re just logging.

Detection-first SIEM isn’t a product feature. It’s an engineering mindset.

ReZaAdineH