EDR vs. MDR: Why ESET Inspect alone does not mean 24/7 security monitoring
On Wednesday at 11:47 PM, PowerShell launches on one of the accounting workstations (a tool this specific user has never used before). The process establishes a connection to an external IP address. ESET Inspect logs this event and generates a detection aligned with the MITRE ATT&CK matrix tactics.
What happens next? The answer to this question represents the core difference between EDR and MDR – and the point where many organizations hit a wall, discovering the gap between what technology can detect and what a human must physically do.
We assume you are familiar with EDR-class systems or already use ESET Inspect, which is why this article focuses on practice. How do you assess whether your organization currently has the operational capacity to handle what the system detects? Where does the scope of the tool itself end, and where does the analyst’s work begin? We compare EDR and MDR side by side to help you make the right decision.
What does ESET Inspect provide as a technology layer?
ESET Inspect, operating alongside the ESET PROTECT platform, is an EDR/XDR-class system – Endpoint Detection and Response, a tool for detection and response at the endpoint level. It delivers a concrete set of capabilities that enable:
detailed visibility into activity on workstations and servers -processes, files, network connections, registry changes,
detection of incidents, anomalies, and behavior that deviates from the baseline,
analysis of indicators of compromise (IOCs) and mapping events to tactics and techniques from the MITRE ATT&CK matrix,
the ability to take technical action: isolating a device from the network, terminating a process, blocking an executable file, launching a remote terminal shell,
a rules engine allowing the creation of custom detection scenarios.
That is quite a lot. ESET Inspect monitoring runs continuously – telemetry from endpoints streams into the console 24 hours a day, regardless of whether anyone is actively using it at that moment.
That last sentence is critical. The system collects data and generates detections around the clock, but whether someone is analyzing them around the clock is an entirely different matter. This is the difference between EDR and MDR to which we will return, but first…
What does an administrator or analyst still need to do?
Before moving to the response itself, it is worth asking: why is this computer active at such a late hour in the first place? This is a great moment to highlight the importance of logging out and completely shutting down equipment after finishing work. Leaving a workstation running and connected to the network overnight is nothing less than offering cybercriminals a quiet window to carry out an attack.
Let’s return to PowerShell at 11:47 PM. The detection lights up red in the console. What next?
Someone has to see it. If no one reviews alerts at night, the notification waits until morning. A process that could have been the initial step of an attack had several hours to proceed further before anyone responded.
Assume, however, that someone is monitoring the console in real time. The next step is evaluating the event. Launching PowerShell is not proof of an attack on its own – after all, it is an administrative tool used every day. The context is what matters:
- Who launched it?
- Have they done this before?
What did it connect to?
What happened afterward?
The same logic applies to other scenarios: PsExec used to execute remote commands across subsequent devices, an RDP login at an unusual hour from a new location, or a process attempting to access LSASS memory to harvest credentials.
To evaluate the situation, an investigation is necessary – checking the user and device history, verifying the connection’s reputation, establishing the sequence of events… Operating an EDR system requires time, log analysis experience, and, most importantly, availability here and now, rather than in spare moments between password resets and project meetings.
If the analysis confirms that the situation warrants a response, someone must decide on an action. Device isolation is simple to execute in the console. The question is whether it is a proportionate action in this specific case. Could it unnecessarily halt a vital business process? It requires judgment, not just clicking a button.
These represent three distinct competencies:
- real-time availability,
- the ability to analyze context,
- experience in making response decisions.
None of these are provided by the software license alone.
Why does generating a detection not conclude incident handling?
A detection is a signal, not a closed case. It is worth emphasizing that there are many such signals every single day. Anyone who thinks that only detections confirming an actual security incident appear in the console is mistaken. In reality, the vast majority are false positives, but we only discover this after human analysis has taken place.
Does EDR work 24/7? Yes, in the sense of data collection and alert generation – telemetry takes no breaks at night. However, the complete lifecycle looks roughly like this:
Detection → Triage/Qualification → Investigation → Decision → Response → Documentation → Lessons Learned
An EDR system is responsible solely for the first element of this chain. The subsequent steps require a human.
An organization can have a flawlessly deployed ESET Inspect and simultaneously lack the operational capacity to close this loop outside standard business hours. Not because the administrator is incapable of doing so. A lean team simply cannot simultaneously maintain infrastructure, support users, deliver ongoing projects, and analyze every sequence of events at any given hour.
Furthermore, unresolved detections from one day must be verified as soon as possible—ideally first thing the next morning. The problem is that they do not disappear, and the system continues generating them uninterrupted over weekends, holidays, or administrator vacations. The backlog quickly turns into a snowball effect that becomes increasingly difficult to control over time.
This is not an assessment of the IT team’s competence; it is a statement of fact. Time is always a deficit that cannot be stretched, regardless of how well someone knows the environment.
The difference between EDR and MDR – how does MDR complement ESET Inspect?
We arrive at the core question: what do ESET Inspect and MDR mean together, and how do they differ separately?
EDR is technology – it provides visibility, data, and response capabilities. MDR (Managed Detection and Response) is a service – a team of experts that operates this technology continuously, taking on the operational burden.
It is worth clarifying one more point: ESET documentation indicates various qualifying subscription tiers for ESET Inspect itself, as well as separate vendor packages covering their native MDR service. Perceptus MDR is built on ESET Inspect technology, but it is not identical to the license alone or to the MDR provided directly by the vendor. It is a distinct operational collaboration model.
Perceptus MDR closes the gap highlighted in the previous section:
Continuous monitoring – certified engineers monitor the environment 24/7/365, so a detection at 11:47 PM does not wait until morning.
Triage and context – the team analyzes the sequence of events, object reputation, user, device, time, and execution frequency to distinguish administrative activity from something requiring deeper investigation.
Investigation – if the situation demands it, analysts determine the source, scope, and progression of the event instead of stopping at the alert itself.
Response according to agreed playbooks – actions such as device isolation, file blocking, or process termination are executed within rules established in advance with the client. In unusual scenarios or those requiring business decisions, the team contacts a designated organization representative rather than acting without missing context.
Documentation and continuous improvement – after handling an event, the team analyzes the root cause, prepares recommendations, and refines detection rules within ESET Inspect itself so the console better fits the environment’s profile over time.
EDR tells you what is happening on endpoints. MDR helps identify what matters and how to respond. The administrator still knows the environment best (dependencies, exceptions, change history). We add continuous observation and specialized analysis precisely where resources are stretched thin.
When can an organization manage EDR sufficiently on its own?
Not every organization needs a managed model today.
Managing ESET Inspect in-house makes sense when several conditions are met simultaneously:
The IT team has dedicated time for regular console analysis, rather than checking it “on the side” of other duties.
There is more than one person in the organization who knows the environment well enough to assess event context, as a single specialist is a single point of failure – including when they are on leave.
The environment does not require an on-call duty outside standard business hours, or the organization has a dedicated, established process for it.
The scale of the environment (number of devices, users, locations) allows keeping up with the volume of generated detections in real time without alert fatigue.
The team possesses up-to-date knowledge of current APT (Advanced Persistent Threat) trends and tracks emerging cyber threats continuously.
If these conditions are met, self-managing EDR should be sufficient.
When should you consider a managed model?
Consider transitioning to a managed model when several signals appear within your IT department:
alerts from ESET Inspect are verified with delays, only after impacts occur or alongside other tasks,
the organization lacks an on-call rotation or investigative expertise available outside business hours,
legitimate administrative tools (PowerShell, PsExec, RDP) make it difficult to clearly distinguish normal activity from a potential Living Off The Land attack,
written, agreed-upon procedures are missing: who is authorized to isolate a device, when to notify management, and what evidence to preserve,
configuration and rules in the console are not regularly reviewed or optimized due to a lack of time,
the organization requires reports and an audit trail documenting how events were handled – for compliance, clients, or corporate group requirements,
a key administrator or security specialist left the company, taking incident response institutional knowledge with them,
the environment has grown – new branches, remote work, more endpoints – and the volume of events exceeds the team’s available bandwidth.
None of these signals on their own necessarily means you must switch the operational model immediately. A single issue can be resolved internally. However, several occurring at once provide a compelling reason to verify whether your current way of working with ESET Inspect is truly keeping pace with what the system detects.
Looking to enhance your cybersecurity?
Contact us!
Leave your details – we’ll call you back
Our specialist will get back to you no later than the next business day. You don’t have to fill in the message field, but a brief note about the topic you’re interested in will be a valuable hint for us.
