Can AI Really Solve Alert Fatigue? Monzy Merza on The Ravit Show
Conversation on The Ravit Show, published July 15, 2026
Every security team wants faster investigations, fewer false positives, and less manual work, and AI is pitched as the answer to all three. The Ravit Show puts the harder version of the question to Monzy Merza, Crogl's Founder and CEO: can AI actually solve alert fatigue, or are we expecting too much from it?
What the conversation covers
The show sets out six threads, listed here in its own framing.
- What is actually working with AI in the SOC today
- Why alert fatigue continues to overwhelm security teams
- Whether AI is reducing the problem or simply changing it
- How the role of security analysts is evolving
- Where human judgment still matters in an AI-powered SOC
- Why Crogl launched a free enterprise-grade AI SOC platform
Where Crogl stands on alert fatigue
Crogl's published position, offered as context for the episode rather than as a substitute for it.
Alert fatigue is a symptom of an investigation gap. Enterprise SOCs receive around 4,330 alerts a day and investigate roughly 37% of them, so most alerts close with no documented finding. That is not a diligence problem. Each alert needs context from several systems, each system has its own query language, and each language has its own in-house expert, so an investigation runs at the speed of whichever expert is on shift.
Tuning detections lowers the count without closing the gap, because the alerts that get suppressed are not reliably the ones that did not matter. Crogl takes the other route and investigates all of them, then hands an analyst a documented result to decide on. The analyst keeps the judgment: Crogl handles the investigation. The analyst makes the call.
On the free platform, the reasoning is that a security team should be able to test this against its own alerts before a procurement conversation, so the download is free and the pricing that follows carries no per-alert, per-investigation, or per-user fees.