Defender For IoT

The documentation is largely platform-neutral, focusing on network-based alerts and OT protocols. However, there are a few alert types that reference Windows-specific concepts (e.g., 'Unauthorized Windows Process', 'Unauthorized Windows Service', 'Suspicion of Remote Code Execution with PsExec', 'Suspicion of Remote Windows Service Management'), which may suggest a slight Windows bias in terms of threat modeling. There are no examples, instructions, or tooling references that are Windows- or PowerShell-specific, nor are Windows patterns prioritized over Linux equivalents. Linux/macOS users are not excluded from understanding or using the documentation.

• Where Windows-specific alerts are mentioned, consider adding equivalent examples or references for Linux/macOS processes/services if relevant to the product's scope.
• Clarify whether similar monitoring exists for Linux/macOS endpoints, or explicitly state platform limitations for endpoint-specific alerts.
• Ensure future documentation sections (especially those involving configuration, troubleshooting, or integrations) provide parity for Linux/macOS environments if applicable.

The documentation page is a reference for Microsoft Defender for IoT alerts and does not provide platform-specific instructions, examples, or tooling guidance. However, there are a few alert titles and descriptions that reference Windows-specific concepts (e.g., 'Unauthorized Windows Process', 'Unauthorized Windows Service', 'Suspicion of Remote Code Execution with PsExec', 'Suspicion of Remote Windows Service Management'), which may indicate a slight Windows bias in the types of alerts covered. There are no PowerShell-heavy sections, Windows-first examples, or missing Linux examples, as the page is not instructional but descriptive.

• Clarify that alerts referencing Windows processes/services are applicable only to Windows endpoints, and provide equivalent Linux/macOS alert types if supported.
• Add alert types or descriptions for Linux/macOS-specific threats or processes if the product supports them.
• Ensure parity in alert coverage for non-Windows platforms, or explicitly state platform limitations where applicable.

The documentation does not explicitly show Windows bias through the use of Windows-specific tools, PowerShell commands, or Windows-first ordering. However, it lacks any mention of Linux-specific instructions, tools, or examples for configuring the LogRhythm collector, which is a common scenario in cross-platform environments. The absence of Linux guidance may disadvantage Linux users.

• Add explicit instructions or references for configuring LogRhythm collectors on Linux systems, including any relevant commands or configuration file locations.
• Include examples or screenshots that demonstrate both Windows and Linux environments where applicable.
• Clarify that the instructions are platform-agnostic if that is the case, or specify any platform-specific steps required.
• Provide troubleshooting tips for both Windows and Linux collectors, if differences exist.

The documentation focuses exclusively on configuring SPAN ports on Cisco switches using Cisco CLI and GUI, with no mention of Windows, Powershell, or Windows-specific tools. However, there is a notable absence of Linux-specific guidance or examples, such as how to verify mirrored traffic on a Linux-based Defender for IoT sensor or using Linux tools to validate the configuration.

• Add examples or references for verifying SPAN/mirrored traffic on Linux-based Defender for IoT sensors (e.g., using tcpdump, Wireshark, or similar tools).
• Include troubleshooting steps or commands for both Windows and Linux environments to ensure parity.
• Explicitly mention that Defender for IoT sensors may run on Linux and provide guidance for common Linux network monitoring/validation tasks.
• If relevant, provide sample configuration or verification steps for other operating systems/platforms where Defender for IoT sensors may be deployed.