We compared CylancePROTECT and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: CylancePROTECT offers a quick and easy setup process, a user-friendly dashboard, and strong AI-based protection. However, users have raised concerns about its pricing, the user-friendliness of the dashboard, and the lack of control over agent installation. In contrast, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint provides continuous monitoring and threat detection, along with strong integration capabilities and reliable performance. However, there are areas where it can improve, such as enhancing client performance, improving the user interface, and delivering faster response times. Furthermore, CylancePROTECT's technical support is perceived as slow, while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint's support receives mixed reviews.
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well."
"It secures different entry points into the network."
"The non-daily requirement to update signatures is the most valuable feature. From a functional point of view, it is pretty spot on. For instance, we compared an algorithm from five years ago to today's algorithm, and it was 98% accurate. It has the ability to detect and mitigate. In the industrial environment that we work in, there's what we call OT versus IT. You are IT Central, but this is OT. Generally, we don't have the same level of skillset as IT individuals or IT professionals have. This particular product doesn't require you to be a computer scientist to be able to understand its proprietary algorithm and to be able to deploy, use, and work within it. It integrates well with a robust SIEM or SOAR solution, and it plays nice with others. We use other detection solutions like CyberX or site provision with Cisco, and it plays nice. That's one of the things we really liked about it."
"Blackberry Protect offers endpoint protection. It's easy to deploy. It's scalable and stable."
"It provides good insight into the programs, applications, or websites that may need attention."
"The solution’s AI is its most valuable feature."
"Its setup is simple if you have a Windows device; it is executable."
"The solution is very quick at easily changing the levels of protection for each computer and the server."
"It has the best live response feature."
"It actually does some heuristics, and some behavioral analysis."
"Once the solution is installed and configured correctly it does not require a lot of hands-on attention until you need upgrading."
"The product allows us to focus on endpoint and antivirus protection."
"CB Defense is more powerful, and you can take more actions than others. Its security features and signatures are constantly updated, so it is more effective than other security solutions."
"The solution has a library where we can have multiple threat intels onboarded. We just have to subscribe to a particular site intel and they'll provide us with all of the truncated details so that we can create IOCs and alerts on the basis of those IOCs."
"The data analysis is the most valuable because of the whitelist database. It is different than standard IDS solutions."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is one of the best EDR tools in the market."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The solution is not stable."
"The support needs improvement."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"I would like to see a better UI in terms of sifting through more specific data and providing analytics. A little bit more would be nice."
"CylancePROTECT could be improved in its technical support and communication."
"The AI of CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. I'm on a trial license of SentinelOne, and its AI is much better than what's on CylancePROTECT."
"rom my experience interacting with the primary or the central administrative console, it's quite complex. You would need a fair bit of technical experience to set it up, implement and maintain it. That would be one area for improvement."
"If they can add more features on top of their Persona feature that would be ideal."
"We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard."
"The product must make the interface a little more user-friendly."
"The solution’s technical support could be improved."
"At this point, we're test-bedding several other providers right now to see if there's anything that does equally or better and that comes at a better price point."
"In our company, we also wanted to have network detection, like a host-based IDS on VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, but we did not get it."
"The support is poor."
"I would like to see improvements made so that we can better see all of the processes."
"The application control can be improved. It should also have an automatic update of the agents."
"Report generation can be improved."
"The device control feature could also be compatible with the user’s profile as well."
"This product should be cheaper."
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 62 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Carbon Black Endpoint writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager. See our CylancePROTECT vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.