» Resources » Eye Security Blog »
Written by Eye Security
You have endpoint protection. You have monitoring. You have a partner watching for threats. By most measures, you are doing the right things.
So here is an uncomfortable question. If your auditor called tomorrow and asked to see your logs from six months ago, what would you show them?
For most IT managers at mid-sized European companies, the honest answer is nothing. Not because the threat wasn’t detected. Not because nobody was watching. But because the tools doing the watching quietly deleted the evidence weeks ago.
This is the 90-day blind spot. Most companies don’t know it exists until it’s too late.
The two most widely deployed endpoint detection tools in the mid-market are Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon. Both retain log data for 90 days by default. CrowdStrike retains benign activity data for just 7 days. After that, it’s gone.
That sounds reasonable until you look at what happens during a real incident. According to IBM’s 2025 Cost of a Data Breach report, the average time to identify a breach is 181 days. That is around six months. By the time most companies discover they have been compromised, the logs covering the first half of the attack have already been automatically deleted by the tools that were supposed to protect them.
The threat actor moved quietly for months. The evidence of how they got in, what they touched, and how far they moved is gone. The investigation starts in the dark.
Incidents are not the only scenario where this matters. Regulators and insurers are asking the same question your security team would ask after a breach. Can you show me what your environment looked like three months ago? Six months ago? Last September?
NIS2 requires organisations to implement appropriate logging and monitoring as part of their risk management obligations. ENISA guidance points to six months as a baseline for essential entities. Cyber insurers are increasingly asking about log retention capability at renewal. None of this maps onto the 14-to-90-day default your endpoint tools are keeping.
The gap is not a technical failure. It is a default setting that nobody changed, because nobody told them it needed changing.
The standard answer to a log retention gap is a SIEM. Deploy it, configure it, staff it, maintain it. Budget six figures. Hire the specialist who knows how to run it.
For a 350-person manufacturer whose IT team of two already handles everything else, that is not an answer. That is a different problem. The cost and complexity of a SIEM was designed for enterprise security teams with dedicated headcount. It was never built for a stretched IT manager who also runs the helpdesk, manages the infrastructure, and fields questions from the CFO about the cyber insurance renewal.
The result is that most mid-sized companies do nothing. The gap stays open. The default settings stay unchanged. And the 90-day window keeps rolling forward, quietly overwriting the record.
Closing the log retention gap does not require a SIEM. It requires a 12-month log archive that is EU-stored, and accessible when it matters.
When an auditor asks for September, the answer is yes. When an incident investigation needs to reach back six months to understand how a threat entered the environment, the record exists. When the insurance broker asks about log retention at renewal, the box is already checked.
The logs should be there from day one. Retrieval should not require a project. And the team pulling the records should be the same team that detected the threat, not a separate forensics firm brought in after the fact.
Eye Log is a log retention add-on to Eye Cyber Guard. It stores 12 months of logs in EU-based storage.
When the auditor asks, the answer is already there. When an incident needs to reach back further than 90 days, the logs are there and the analysts who need them already have access.
The 90-day blind spot is a default setting. It does not have to stay that way.
Products and Solutions
Even cybersecurity has to compete for budget. Invest too little, and you leave gaps that can become expensive. Spend heavily without knowing where the money is going, and you build an impressive security stack without materially reducing risk. So what are other businesses spending? And is there evidence that greater investment pays off?
Cyberattacks do not keep office hours. For European mid-market companies, that creates a very practical security challenge. Few have the resources to build an internal security operation that can monitor systems, investigate threats, and respond around the clock. But when an attack happens, waiting until the IT team is back online is not an option […]
Cybersecurity investment across Europe is not standing still. ENISA’s latest NIS Investments study found that cybersecurity accounted for around 9% of IT budgets among the EU organisations surveyed, with median annual spending reaching €1.5 million. But investment does not necessarily equal readiness.
