Threat Intelligence Feed Triage
Subscribing to multiple threat intelligence feeds produces a large volume of indicators of compromise, but most of them are redundant across vendors, aged out from prior campaigns, or simply irrelevant because they target a technology stack the organization doesn't run. Analysts reviewing raw feed output either spend hours filtering by hand or, more commonly, stop reviewing the feeds closely at all, which defeats the point of paying for them — the handful of indicators that are genuinely relevant to your actual environment get lost in a volume of intel that was never scoped to it.
STARTING PRICE
From €299
Standard tier · Multi-step workflow with AI extraction/decisioning and 2-3 integrations.
Get a quote →Saves roughly 5-7 hrs/week of manual threat feed review and cross-vendor deduplication.
How the automation works
We ingest your threat intelligence feeds, deduplicate indicators that multiple vendors report redundantly, and score relevance against your actual environment — the technologies you run, the sectors you're in, and assets in your inventory — rather than treating every feed indicator as equally worth an analyst's time. Relevant indicators are matched automatically against your internal logs to surface any existing hits, and the resulting shortlist goes to an analyst with the relevance reasoning attached. Matching an indicator to internal logs never triggers an automatic block on its own — any resulting containment action, such as blocking an IP or domain, goes through analyst review first, since feed-sourced indicators do carry a false-positive rate.
Process flow
- 01
Feeds ingested continuously trigger
Indicators from all connected threat intelligence feeds are ingested continuously as vendors publish them.
- 02
Deduplicate cross-vendor indicators ai
Indicators reported redundantly across multiple feeds are consolidated into a single entry to avoid reviewing the same indicator repeatedly.
- 03
Score relevance against your environment ai
Indicators are scored for relevance against your technology stack, sector, and asset inventory, deprioritizing intel that doesn't apply to your actual environment.
- 04
Match relevant indicators against internal logs integration
High-relevance indicators are checked against your own logs for existing hits, surfacing any indicator that's already present in your environment.
- 05
Route shortlist to analyst with context output
The relevance-scored shortlist, including any internal log matches, goes to an analyst with the reasoning attached — no containment action is taken automatically.
- 06
Report feed value and coverage output
Relevance rates and match outcomes by feed source are reported, giving visibility into which paid feeds are actually producing useful, environment-relevant intel.
Inputs
- Threat intelligence feed subscriptions
- Technology stack and asset inventory
- Sector/industry context
- Internal log access for indicator matching
Outputs
- Deduplicated, relevance-scored indicator shortlist
- Internal log match results
- Analyst review queue with reasoning
- Feed value and coverage reporting
Works with
Prefer a fully custom build instead of an off-the-shelf integration? We scope both options during your free consultation — most jobs like this one work fine on standard connectors, but higher-volume or non-standard systems sometimes need bespoke API work, reflected in the complex tier.
Where this goes wrong if you get it wrong
- Relevance scoring is only as good as the asset inventory behind it — an incomplete or outdated inventory means indicators targeting technology you actually run but didn't record get scored as irrelevant and dropped, which defeats the entire point of the scoring layer.
- Feed indicators carry a real false-positive rate, and blocking an IP or domain automatically based on a feed match alone risks disrupting legitimate traffic, particularly with shared infrastructure or CDN-hosted IPs — any containment action needs analyst review before it's actioned, not automatic enforcement on a match.
- Aged-out indicators from a resolved campaign continue circulating in feeds long after they're operationally useful, and without staleness filtering the shortlist fills with historically-interesting-but-currently-irrelevant intel that crowds out genuinely current indicators.
- Relevance scoring tuned too aggressively toward your current known stack can suppress an indicator relevant to a newly adopted tool or vendor that hasn't been added to the asset inventory yet, so the scoring needs a periodic recalibration pass as the environment evolves.
Frequently asked questions
Does this automatically block indicators found in the feeds?
No — matching an indicator against your logs or environment produces a flagged item for analyst review; any block or containment action requires human review first, since feed indicators carry a genuine false-positive rate.
How is relevance determined?
Against your actual technology stack, sector, and asset inventory — an indicator targeting a platform you don't run is deprioritized regardless of how severe the underlying threat is rated by the feed vendor.
Does this replace our threat intelligence feed subscriptions?
No, it sits on top of the feeds you already subscribe to and filters, deduplicates, and scores their output for relevance to your environment.
How is this different from SIEM alert deduplication?
This triages external threat intelligence feed indicators for relevance before they become alerts; SIEM alert deduplication handles alerts already generated by your own detection tools.