Index › Security operations › ASM › Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs CyCognito
Attack surface management · October 2026 Edition
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs CyCognito
One of fourteen models named Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management first on the direct prompt; two named CyCognito. Both were named by all fourteen models and both carry 39 labels, so the shares below are directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share10%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate18%26%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#4A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels3939Equal, which is what makes the shares comparable.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Intruder was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Intruder vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management · Intruder vs CyCognito · Attaxion vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the attack surface management page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface ManagementFirst choices, of fourteen modelsCyCognito
Direct123 against CyCognito
Paraphrase201 against CyCognito
Comparative021 against Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Budget-constrained103 against CyCognito
Scale-constrained111 against Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Negative005 against Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management · 3 against CyCognito
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management and CyCognito were named in the same answer seventy times, of the 116 answers naming Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management and the 106 naming CyCognito. In those answers CyCognito took the first choice eight times and Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management five.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management and CyCognito stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | | |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | |||
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | ||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | |
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management CyCognito first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management on the left and CyCognito on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management and CyCognito stood in it.
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management first, CyCognito not the choice
1 of 14 modelsCyCognito was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-6 LunaMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management alternatives: Censys ASM, CrowdStrike Falcon Exposure Management, Rapid7 Surface Command
CyCognito first, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management not the choice
2 of 14 modelsMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5CyCognito alternatives: Hadrian, Halo Security, Intruder
MiniMax M2.5CyCognito, Intruder alternatives: Mandiant Attack Surface Management
Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniUpGuard BreachSight alternatives: CyCognito, Intruder, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, Tenable Attack Surface Management
DeepSeek V4 FlashIntruder alternatives: Censys ASM, CrowdStrike Falcon Surface, CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Kimi K2Intruder alternatives: Detectify, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
GLM 4.7 FlashXIntruder alternatives: CyCognito, UpGuard BreachSight
Neither was named
7 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Gemini 3.5 FlashIntruder alternatives: Detectify, UpGuard BreachSight, runZero
Perplexity SonarIntruder alternatives: Cortex Xpanse, Mandiant Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
Grok 4.1 FastIntruder alternatives: Bitsight, Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, Rapid7 Surface Command
Mistral SmallIntruder alternatives: Bitsight, Detectify
Llama 4 MaverickIntruder alternatives: Bitsight, Qualys
Qwen 3.7 FlashIntruder alternatives: Rapid7
Muse Glimmer 30BIntruder, UpGuard BreachSight alternatives: Attaxion, Halo Security
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Level: the same share of first choices.
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management2%#10 of 13CyCognito2%#12 of 13Mid-marketThe figures above
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management leads by four points.
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management10%#3 of 12CyCognito6%#4 of 12Enterprise
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management leads by nine points.
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management16%#2 of 9CyCognito7%#3 of 9What the models said about Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Microsoft’s native ASM is described as tightly integrated with Defender and Azure, so it may be less suitable if you need broad multi-cloud, SaaS, or heterogeneous coverage” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“integrates deeply with Microsoft/Sentinel/Defender; limited third-party integration for non-Microsoft environments.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“while Microsoft Defender EASM is excellent at passive discovery, its active vulnerability scanning can be lacking” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“the best attack surface management (ASM) platform is Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management (EASM) if you already use Microsoft 365/E5” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“I'd generally recommend Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management as the first tool to evaluate” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“I'd start with Microsoft Defender EASM—especially if you already use Azure or Microsoft security tools.” GPT-6 Luna · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about CyCognito
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Also flagged as a criticized challenger (39% negative labels)” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“Strong for automated discovery, but the search results point more toward complex environments than a typical mid-market default.” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · soft negative
“you do not need to pay for five-figure, enterprise-grade platforms like Palo Alto Cortex Xpanse or CyCognito” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“Validation separates the best. Platforms like CyCognito and Synack actively test whether exposures are truly exploitable” DeepSeek V4 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“I'd suggest starting evaluations with CyCognito (if you want comprehensive discovery and have the budget)” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Highly praised for autonomous discovery... Leaders like CyCognito stand out for validation beyond detection” Grok 4.1 Fast · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared
Intruder vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface ManagementIntruder vs CyCognitoAttaxion vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface ManagementAttaxion vs CyCognitoMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs UpGuard BreachSightMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs DetectifyMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs Tenable Attack Surface ManagementMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs CrowdStrike Falcon SurfaceCyCognito vs UpGuard BreachSightCyCognito vs DetectifyCyCognito vs Tenable Attack Surface ManagementCyCognito vs CrowdStrike Falcon SurfaceAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full ASM standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.