Striking the Right Balance in Security Consolidation

Security teams today are overwhelmed—not just by threats, but by tool sprawl, overlapping capabilities, and an increasingly complex tech stack. Consolidation offers a path forward, but only if it’s done with intent. This means defining the problem first, optimizing—not just simplifying—the stack, and building a cohesive ecosystem that strengthens visibility, resilience, and response. Insider risk management is a prime area to consolidate for faster insider threat detection and reduced overhead. And when evaluating platforms, rigorous proof-of-value testing is essential. Smart tool consolidation is about the right tools, working together, with clarity, context, and control.

Understanding the Problem Before Implementing Technology

Security consolidation isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach. Each organization has unique use cases, mission outcome goals, workflows, tools, and risk factors that must be considered. Before making any changes, security leaders must define the problems they need to solve rather than simply adopting technology or any form of platformization for the sake of consolidation.

A major driver for reassessing security architecture is the ever-changing threat landscape. Traditional risk management defenses struggle to keep up as organizations increasingly rely on multi-cloud strategies and a patchwork of security tools. Rather than bolstering security, this level of complexity actually expands the attack surface, making organizations more vulnerable to threats. Thoughtful consolidation helps mitigate these risks by reducing redundancies, improving interoperability, and strengthening security postures.

Where to Start? The Journey to a Healthy Consolidation Strategy

Security leaders should start by identifying foundational tools that provide critical functions, such as network security and firewalls. From there, they can assess areas where consolidation adds strategic value.

One area prone to overcomplexity is threat management. Many organizations layer multiple tools for data loss prevention (DLP), content inspection, and blocking—resulting in tool proliferation. Instead of maintaining multiple disparate tools, security leaders should aim for a streamlined set of two or three that address key security concerns:

• Blocking attacks (e.g., malware prevention, perimeter security)
• Detecting infiltration and compromise (e.g., threat intelligence, SIEM)
• Managing insider risk (e.g., user behavior analytics, DLP, user activity monitoring)

A well-executed consolidation strategy ensures these elements work together seamlessly, reducing redundant tools while strengthening security posture. This is an example of starting from the problem we’re trying to solve and working backwards.

Insider Risk Management: A Prime Use Case for Consolidation

Insider risk management is the next frontier and a key capability area that exemplifies the benefits of security consolidation. A recent Ponemon Institute report found that 49% of companies consider integrating solutions like DLP, user activity monitoring, and user behavior analytics essential or very important. The key drivers for this integration include cost savings (85%), reduced complexity (64%), faster detection times (61%), scalability (48%), and actionable data (42%).

Instead of relying on disconnected tools for behavior analytics, threat detection, and data loss prevention, a unified insider risk management platform provides comprehensive visibility and contextual intelligence. This consolidation reduces operational burdens while enabling security teams to detect and mitigate risks more effectively.

Security leaders should look for the following green flags when evaluating consolidated insider risk management solutions:

• Built from the ground up – Native capability development rather than a patchwork of acquisitions.
• Trustworthy roadmap – Clear, realistic development plans with consistent updates, innovation, and a plan for the future.
• Seasoned leadership, specifically in product and engineering – Strong track record of execution and innovation.
• True integration – Unified security data, not just bundled tools.
• AI-driven risk detection – Leverages and leads in AI for proactive threat mitigation.
• Ease of use – Analyst pain point of combing through a sea of data reduced to meaningful starting points on risky behaviors of interest.
• Minimal overhead to effectively operate – limited professional services manpower necessary from the vendor to operationalize the capability.

At the same time, organizations should watch out for red flags, including:

• Complicated and expensive support – Hard-to-navigate customer service models and exorbitant overhead.
• Closed ecosystems – Lack of integration with complementary security tools and the broader security ecosystem.
• Opaque AI models – Lack of transparency in how AI-driven decisions are made.
• Poor user experience – Unintuitive interfaces that hinder security teams and create unending pain points for analysts.
• Roadmaps that never deliver – consistent missed deadlines on promised capabilities.

Testing Before Trusting: The Importance of Proof of Value (POV)

When considering consolidated solutions, security leaders should never take vendor claims at face value. Running proof-of-value (POV) tests, challenging vendor engineers, and holding providers accountable through bake-offs will help determine if a platform truly meets organizational needs and set you on a greater path to mission success before the contract is ever signed.

Final Thoughts: Security Agility Over One-Size-Fits-All

Consolidation, when approached strategically, is not just about reducing complexity—it’s about enhancing security effectiveness. By defining the problem first, consolidating where it makes sense, and rigorously testing vendor claims, security leaders can create a security strategy that is resilient, agile, and prepared for the ever-evolving threat landscape.

Unified Insider Risk Study: Proof is in the Pudding

The Forrester Total Economic Impact™ study commissioned by DTEX offers valuable insights into how organizations are optimizing their security operations. Key findings include:

• $3.29M in tech stack savings over three years by consolidating legacy DLP, UAM, and UEBA tools
• A 75% reduction in insider threat investigation time with unified, real-time visibility
• $705K in insider risk efficiencies over three years

This report provides a comprehensive view of how consolidating security tools can drive cost savings and improve the detection of insider risks. 

Read the full study to explore how these strategies are reshaping security operations and delivering measurable business outcomes.