Security teams have never had more visibility and yet, they’ve never felt more overwhelmed. Logs stream in from every system. Dashboards light up with real-time metrics. Automated reports stack up in inboxes. On paper, everything is being tracked.
But when someone asks a simple question: Who has domain admin rights right now? What changed yesterday? Why did this alert trigger? the answer is rarely immediate.
Instead, it requires pivoting between dashboards, exporting logs, applying filters, correlating events, and manually stitching context together. The data exists. The visibility is there. What’s missing is usability.
This is the usability gap: the space between having security data and being able to turn it into clear, confident decisions quickly. And for many security teams, that gap is where risk quietly grows.
The Problem Isn’t Data- It’s Friction
Security teams aren’t struggling because they lack data. If anything, they’re overwhelmed by it. Logs, alerts, audit trails, compliance metrics, everything is being captured. The challenge lies in what it takes to turn that data into usable answers.
Every investigation requires jumping between tools, applying filters, exporting reports, and manually correlating events. Context gets lost. Time gets wasted. Risk lingers longer than it should. This operational friction slows response times, increases the likelihood of errors, and makes identity and access management far more complex than necessary.
That friction shows up in predictable, everyday ways:
- Switching Between Dashboards: Analysts are constantly switching between dashboards to look at compliance indicators, logs, alerts, and user behavior. Workflows are disrupted by this continuous tracking since users lose context and waste time navigating interfaces. This would result in fragmented insight into vulnerabilities such as over-privileged accounts and slower incident response.
- Manually Building Reports: Reports are created manually in a straightforward manner to address basic management inquiries. Pulling from desperate sources is necessary when creating custom reports. This tedious procedure diverts experts from analysis to organizing information, adds errors, and delays compliance reporting.
- Filtering and Correlating Logs: The shift through massive log volumes from Active Directory changes, user behavior, and access events demands manual filters and cross-tool correlation. Without unified views, spotting anomalies like risky role assignments becomes guesswork, prolonging threat detection. This friction heightens exposure to privilege escalation attacks.
- Alert Fatigue: Teams become tired and forced to deal with noise before they can focus on the signal since alerts keep pouring in. When priorities are not intelligently grouped, burnout and missed opportunities result. In situations with significant stakes, this weakens security posture.
- Context Scattered Across Modules: It takes a conscious effort to piece together pertinent data, such as user roles, permissions, audit logs, and risk scores, which are scattered across separate modules or platforms. Root-cause analysis for problems like poor role hygiene is delayed by this scattering. By centralizing context for quicker decision-making, unified platforms lessen this.
Monitoring, reporting, and compliance were the main goals of the majority of security platforms’ architecture. They are excellent at creating audit-ready documentation, generating alarms, keeping logs, and gathering events. Platforms support powerful querying, but not intuitive, natural-language investigation for most users.
The Shift From Dashboards to Answers
Security platforms have spent years gathering a lot of information and displaying it on dashboards. Now the leading security vendors are looking at a different problem: how can security teams use visibility to get real answers on security? The purpose of this change is not to announce a security revolution or replace dashboards. The purpose is to change the way teams use the data they now possess.
The future is not just more charts, it is conversational clarity. Teams want their answers in seconds, not in hours. They want to be able to ask “how many domain admins do I have, and what groups give them access?”
Answers should come with structured explanations and contextual detail. Friction reduces, as investigations become shorter and teams move from workflows to queries.
What Usable Visibility Looks Like
If visibility is about seeing data, usable visibility is about working with it effectively. Here’s what it looks like in practice:
- Plain-Language Questions: Security professionals think in questions, not charts. They think – Who granted this access, why did this permission change, which accounts are risky? Usable visibility allows teams to pose these questions directly, in clear and natural terms, without constructing complex queries every time.
- Structured Answers: The response should not be a wall of logs. It should be structured and contextual. That means a clear summary, supporting details, relevant timestamps, and highlighted risk indicators. Structured answers reduce interpretation time and make it easier to validate the conclusions.
- Reducing Manual Report Building: A lot of security teams are habitually making the same type of reports, for example, summaries of privileged access, changes in group membership, activities of file access. Effective visibility at work exposes a lesser extent to the necessity of creating these reports by hand. Instead of differentiating the views, the teams get focused, ready, for, their, use insights.
- Reduced Alert Noise: Visibility loses value when overwhelmed by noise. Alert fatigue forces teams to shift through low-priority events to find what matters. Usable visibility is characterized as presenting the highest level of clear relevance, lowering duplication, providing context, and rich alerts. The aim isn’t more notifications, but better-quality ones.
- Humans in Control: Usable visibility is a matter of better interaction and not removing human oversight. Security professionals are always the ones who approve the final conclusions, or the decision makers. It doesn’t substitute it. Here the focus is on usability rather than on automation.
How Lepide AI is Making Security Visibility Usable
Lepide AI introduces an intuitive, AI-powered experience that enables security teams to interact with their existing audit and security data using natural language. Instead of manually searching through reports, logs, and alerts, users can ask direct questions and receive clear, human-readable insights that explain what happened, why it matters, and what to do next.
Key capabilities include:
- AI-powered audit insights through natural language search
- Faster investigation and reporting, reducing time to resolution
- Interactive reporting that explains changes and anomalies in context
- Guidance on configuration and best-practice improvements
- Context-rich alerts that prioritise risk rather than noise
By focusing on explainability and operational relevance, Lepide AI helps security teams move beyond passive monitoring to confident, defensible decision-making.
Making Visibility Work at Enterprise Scale
Lepide AI is designed for the real-world complexity of hybrid and on-premises environments, where Active Directory and unstructured data remain foundational to business operations.
With intelligent notifications and reporting, organisations can:
- Reduce alert fatigue by filtering out low-value noise
- Instantly access the full history behind changes and access events
- Fine-tune alerting for greater accuracy
- Review historical actions and alerts for audit and compliance purposes
The result is improved response times, clearer accountability, and stronger control over identity and data risk without adding operational burden.
If you want to know how Lepide AI works, schedule a demo with one of our engineers or start a 20-day free trial today.
