OT Security / OT security operations
OT security operations.Turn alerts into decisions.
A sensor creates visibility, but it does not create an operating process. We connect findings, plant knowledge, change workflows and ownership so relevant OT risks are assessed and tracked without flooding production teams with alerts.
Scope of service
What you receive.
This service fits Cyber Vision or other OT telemetry that already exists while alerts lack clear handling, baselines drift or changes to plants and networks remain disconnected. We do not create an anonymous alert channel. Each relevant class needs context, an owner, a decision and a documented closure.
Alerts that can be assessed
Event classes, technical evidence, plant criticality and escalation criteria are connected. Noise and known recurring states are managed without silently suppressing genuine risk.
Clear roles across IT and OT
Monitoring, initial assessment, plant decisions, vendor contact, change and closure receive named ownership. Handoffs are part of the process rather than dependent on personal knowledge.
Baselines linked to change
New devices, communication paths and risk findings are compared with approved changes and maintenance work. Unexplained deviations remain visible until operations or security decides them.
A review that supports decisions
Open risks, recurring causes, due measures and lifecycle topics are condensed at an agreed cadence. Reports support decisions but do not replace the underlying technical evidence.
The delivery path
Three controlled steps.
- 01
Connect data and ownership
Review sources, events, plant context, teams and existing ticket or change workflows. Expose gaps and duplicated effort.
- 02
Exercise the workflow in a pilot
Run selected event classes through assessment, escalation, change and closure, then refine thresholds with the participating teams.
- 03
Establish operations and review
Handover runbooks, ownership, measures and the review cadence. Changes to the process are versioned and agreed with production and IT.
What we agree before starting
The service follows agreed hours and responsibilities. A dashboard or integration does not imply automatic 24/7 response or a security operations centre. Changes to plant still require operator approval; licences, platform operations and incident response are scoped separately.
Good to know
Your questions. Clear answers.
Does Configlane take over every Cyber Vision alert?
Only within the explicitly agreed scope. We first define relevant event classes, service hours and handoffs. Many decisions require the operator's plant knowledge; that responsibility is not replaced by an external dashboard.
Can the process integrate with our ticketing system?
Yes, when the interface and operating model fit. We begin with the required fields, states and ownership. An API integration only helps once it is clear which event genuinely needs to become a managed ticket.
How do you reduce alert fatigue?
Through bounded use cases, context, traceable thresholds and regular review. Suppressions and known exceptions are documented and time-limited so fewer alerts are not confused with less visibility.
Let’s discuss your requirements
A few details are enough to begin.
You do not need a finished design. We establish the need, boundaries and a dependable next step.
Discuss OT security operationsHelpful for the first conversation
- Existing OT security and monitoring sources
- Teams, escalation paths and current ticket or change processes
- Plant criticality and known recurring alerts
- Required service hours, reviews and escalation boundaries
Please do not submit passwords, API keys or confidential network plans through the form.
Explore the technical detail
From the Cyber Vision API to an actionable caseTechnical background: Cisco Cyber Vision Data Sheet