Neon is designed as a complementary layer — not a replacement for the security tools your team already operates. It closes the browser visibility gap that SIEM and SOAR tools cannot address on their own, and is built to feed that browser-layer telemetry directly into the workflows your security operations team already uses.

Neon easily integrates with leading SIEM platforms via an API, with deeper integrations developed for Elastic, enabling security teams to ingest browser activity events alongside endpoint, network, and cloud telemetry for unified threat hunting and investigation. 

Events from Neon — detections, policy triggers, authentication anomalies, and SaaS access activity — are available as structured log data that maps cleanly into existing SIEM schemas.

SOAR integration enables automated response workflows triggered by Neon detections — for example, automatically escalating a high-confidence phishing detection or flagging a sensitive data exfiltration event for immediate analyst review. Speak with our team to discuss integration options for your specific security stack.

For EDR, Neon complements rather than competes: your EDR handles endpoint and process-level threats; Neon handles the browser session layer that sits above the endpoint and below the application, which existing EDR tools have no visibility into.

‍

Most security investigations hit the same wall: the evidence trail ends at the network perimeter. You can see that a user connected to a destination. You can see DNS resolution timestamps and firewall logs. 

What you can't see is what happened inside the browser session when they got to their final destination — where they actually landed, what they typed, what they submitted, what files were uploaded, what credentials were entered, and whether any of it constituted a genuine threat or a false positive you're about to spend three hours chasing.

Neon closes that gap by giving investigators a complete forensic timeline of browser-level activity — not just metadata, but the full sequence of events as they unfolded at the point of user interaction. 

When a security team opens an investigation with Neon, they can see exactly which applications a user accessed, how they authenticated, if credentials were entered into forms and prompt fields, what files were uploaded, and the precise chain of events that led from initial access to the activity under review.

This matters most in the scenarios where existing tools provide the least visibility: 

• credential theft investigations where the breach source is unclear 
• insider threat cases where you need to distinguish between deliberate exfiltration and accidental data handling
• phishing incidents where you need to reconstruct what the user did after they clicked
• shadow AI exposure events where you need to understand the full scope of what data left the organization and through which channels

For GRC teams, the same telemetry that supports investigation also supports audit. Every policy trigger, authentication event, and flagged interaction is captured as a structured event record — giving compliance teams the audit trail they need to demonstrate enforcement to regulators without requiring a manual review process to reconstruct what happened after the fact.

Neon also integrates with your existing SIEM, so browser-layer events can be correlated alongside endpoint, network, and cloud telemetry in the platform your security operations team already works from — meaning Neon adds a new source of high-fidelity evidence to investigations without creating a separate workflow to manage.

SASE and network monitoring tools observe traffic. Neon observes behavior. That distinction sounds subtle, but it isn't.

SASE platforms operate at the network layer, sitting between the user and the internet to inspect traffic, enforce policies, and log connection events. They're highly effective at what they were built for: controlling network access, filtering destinations, and applying policy at the perimeter. 

But the observability of SASE solutions has a structural ceiling — they see the request and the supposed destination, not the actual destination or what happened on the page. 

Say a user visits a legitimate file-sharing platform, uploads a sensitive document, and walks away generates a clean network log. The SASE tool sees an allowed connection to a trusted domain. At the network layer, this looks benign but the file uploaded actually violates your policy. The actual risk event — the file upload, its contents, the identity used — is invisible.

The deeper problem is encryption. Modern browser traffic is encrypted end-to-end, which means SASE and secure web gateways that want to inspect content must perform SSL decryption — intercepting and re-encrypting traffic through a proxy. It's technically possible, but it's operationally painful, introduces latency, breaks certificate pinning for certain applications, creates a single point of failure in the network path, and still doesn't give you visibility into what happens inside the session once the page loads. What a user types into a form field, what they paste into an AI prompt, what they enter into a credential harvesting page — none of that is captured by traffic inspection, even with SSL decryption enabled.

Neon operates from the opposite end of the architecture. Rather than intercepting traffic from outside the browser, Neon sits inside the browser session itself — after decryption has already occurred, at the layer where user interactions actually happen. 

Neon sees form inputs, prompt content, file uploads, clipboard activity, authentication flows, and the full behavioral context of every session. It captures this without a network proxy, without SSL decryption overhead, and without creating a single point of failure in your connectivity stack.

The result is a fundamentally different quality of observability. SASE tells you where users went. Neon tells you what they did when they got there — which is the data that actually matters when you're investigating an incident, enforcing a data handling policy, or trying to answer a GRC auditor's question about what your organization's browser-based risk exposure actually looks like.

Neon governs the browser layer — above the network perimeter — because network tools cannot reach it, while the browser is becoming the most consequential place where security events occur.