Make Sense of Security Tests: From MITRE to MQs

Security reports may have long names, but they are powerful lenses for evaluating endpoint security. Use them together to build a balanced view of protection, detection, and response so you can choose what fits your environment.

What these reports cover

• Analyst houses like Gartner and Forrester, and specialist labs like AV-Comparatives and SE Labs, publish a wide range of tests
• Scopes vary: full product categories such as EDR, XDR, and MDR; single features like anti-tampering; or high-level market mapping
• MITRE ATT&CK Evaluations emulate advanced adversaries to reveal real-world detection and response behaviors
• The volume can be overwhelming, so select reports based on your use case, risk tolerance, and operational needs
• Together, these sources add objectivity to vendor claims and help buyers make evidence-based decisions

How to navigate the landscape

• Business vs consumer: Match protections to context; home users do not need enterprise-grade XDR
• Market mapping: Gartner Magic Quadrant for EPP, Radicati Market Quadrants reveal vendor positions and trends
• Peer perspective: G2 and Gartner Peer Insights surface in-the-field experiences
• Size and scope: For SMB vs enterprise, see SE Labs split tests and AV-Comparatives enterprise-focused assessments
• Location matters: Forrester Wave for MDR in Europe evaluates regional fit
• Feature-specific: AV-Comparatives Anti-Tampering Certification, Forrester Mobile Threat Defense Landscape, and solution-specific SC Awards
• Advanced attack scenarios: MITRE ATT&CK Evaluations Enterprise, SE Labs PIVOT, and AV-Comparatives Endpoint Prevention and Response Test 2025 assess protection, detection, and forensic investigation

Build your evaluation plan

• Start broad with market quadrants, then drill into feature or scenario tests
• Align to your stack and workflows: EDR, XDR, SOC tooling, and analyst skill sets
• For regional programs, consider local evaluations and regulations
• Want visibility into an EDR against a named threat group’s behaviors? Use MITRE ATT&CK Evaluations
• Exploring European-focused tooling across MDR, XDR, and SOC? Check the ECSO Cyberhive Matrix

The MITRE ATT&CK difference

• Not a commercial test and no best-of ranking
• Think academic study: consistent adversary emulations to expose how tools detect, correlate, and respond
• Emphasizes the why and how behind detections across different use cases, not just a scorecard

Triangulate results for clarity

• Compare findings across multiple tests to validate strengths and gaps
• Look at detection coverage and quality, protection efficacy, response speed, and forensic depth
• Prioritize outcomes that match your SOC processes and alerting thresholds

Finishing touches on vendor due diligence

• Check partnerships, joint operations against APTs, and ecosystem depth
• Look for involvement in major initiatives and events like Locked Shields and RSAC
• Minimal engagement may signal misaligned priorities

ESET’s perspective on testing

• Independent testing drives transparency and product improvement
• Participation in MITRE Engenuity ATT&CK Evaluations provides objective insights into detection of real-world adversary behaviors
• Cross-referencing results with AV-Comparatives, SE Labs, and others offers third-party proof of protection and performance
• Review this year’s MITRE ATT&CK results and compare across tests to see where ESET fits in your security landscape

Source: WeLiveSecurity