No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Cynet comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cynet
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
18th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (20th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (8th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (16th), Threat Deception Platforms (2nd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (8th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (13th), Ransomware Protection (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.6%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cynet is 1.4%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.9%
Cynet1.4%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.6%
Other93.1%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
Sooraj Makkancherrry - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Operations Manager at Philips
Doesn't have daily updates, which is important for healthcare IT
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable. It's a very good and new technology as a tool and antivirus. But sometimes, it doesn't work properly with our medical devices and products, quarantining files it shouldn't even after we add them to exclusions. This is tricky for us.
Roshan Jadhav - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Consultant at Vincacyber
Has improved threat detection and streamlined incident analysis through centralized control and AI-driven insights
People are looking for Cynet because it has next-generation threat protection that detects zero-day threats. It has UEBA (user entity behavior analysis), threat hunting features, and storage device control where we can create profiles and block unauthorized USB storage devices. We can also create threat protection policies to detect malware, ransomware, and many other threats. The most valuable feature is the UBA (User behavior analysis). It has integration with SIEM solutions, allowing us to share our logs to third-party SIEM servers. Cynet has AI integration which showcases complete forensic data about threats, making it very easy to understand what happened with the system and what type of incident was detected. Autonomous breach protection is a feature of Cynet which can detect and mitigate known and unknown threats based on signatures. If there are any signature-less files, malware, or ransomware, it will detect them based on autonomous breach protection capabilities. The centralized management console provides a dashboard where we can see four types of attack vectors and incident counts in real-time. It continuously scans the radar and shows open alerts related to files, hosts, users, or networks. We can easily export these alerts and send reports via email.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"Cortex is the best tool for endpoint detection, and I have used it to verify hashes or domains to identify malicious activity, trigger playbooks that automate and gather endpoint logs, block malicious processes, and update incident tickets, showcasing end-to-end processes with automation in investigation and reducing the analysis workflow."
"We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us."
"The tool is designed to scale for large enterprises and handle large volumes of data."
"Monitoring is most valuable."
"Traps has drastically reduced our endpoint attack surface via advanced detection capabilities, sandboxing of never before seen programs, and by drastically limiting where executables can launch in the first place."
"Cortex XDR alerts us on the dashboard when there's a threat, which allows us to restrict that user and helps secure our infrastructure."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"The quick installation would be the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"I rate the tool a ten out of ten when it comes to the ease of use or management part."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"I've found the AI engine in CylancePROTECT to be particularly effective for technology and in preventing unknown threats."
"The CylancePROTECT agent is very low on CPU usage, so it has virtually no adverse impact on my servers, desktops, or workstations."
"A user can continue to add endpoints and the solution will continue to perform well."
"The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background."
"CylancePROTECT works on AI technology, is always up to date, and uses very few resources on your devices."
"I would recommend Cynet to others."
"The interface is exceptionally clear and easy to understand."
"It can be deployed in autonomous mode, and then it automatically blocks malware threats."
"Aside from the real people behind the product, it gives visibility on the network, on the file level, on the memory level, and it also does user behavior analysis, with a deception capability as well."
"The feature I find most valuable is the reality graphical user interface, which I think is really different from the others on the market."
"They really have a solid product that will save companies a lot of money in licensing costs if they give them a try."
"We are using almost all of the features and we find it quite good overall."
"We are very satisfied with the level of performance we get."
 

Cons

"I would like to see improvement in the tool's user interface, particularly in the area of managing alerts and providing more reporting capabilities."
"On the pricing aspect, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks needs to have a more reasonable rate, particularly for customers in Sri Lanka and Asian countries."
"The deployment is pretty hard."
"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized."
"If you compare it to SentinelOne, which has more functionalities and detection capabilities on an open platform, the pricing on SentinelOne is far more reasonable and cheaper than Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks."
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"It takes time to scan the servers and devices."
"For working with the solution, you only really need a web browser, however, we've found that working on Chrome, for example, is horrible."
"Enhancing the product's detection rates and streamlining the user interface for easier management in daily operations would be beneficial improvements."
"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."
"​Work on the math model. We are catching a lot of false positives, which gets to be a pain at the start of a deployment."
"There are a lot of false positives and it takes up a lot of time."
"It could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions. This is the industrial environment where you have a control center for all the automation that's happening, whether it is oil, gas, or chemical manufacturing. They often have to set up a computer at the back and watch the other stuff to get alerts. In these autonomous or on-premises environments, they often don't have access to email readily. Integration with other industrial solutions, such as HMIS, will allow them to communicate and get an alert that something has been found. This way, they can react to it sooner than having somebody watch the screen and keep checking the screen. Rockwell has its own suite. Similarly, Honeywell has its own suite. There's also an independent HMI/historian solution provider out there called VTSCADA. We actually get asked if we can get it to show up on a screen, which is difficult. Getting those alerts to work within an industrial environment would be a huge plus."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"The initial setup was quite complicated, it took us a month or two with the reseller doing a good job assisting us with the initial configuration."
"It could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions."
"Functions-wise, at present the times for events are not a user's local time, but we assume that will be corrected soon."
"They have automated response capability, and they're moving more and more into SOAR capability. They have built-in deception technology with host-file users, phantoms, etc. We used to call them honeypots. So, they're on target. They're doing a really good job, and they should continue to improve with SOAR."
"Cynet is capable and cloud-based, however, enterprise organizations often prefer on-premises servers for managing entire organizations."
"The inability to add contact information inside the Cynet is also an issue because it makes things more complicated. I would like to have a simple feature to enter a contact name and number for the person taking care of that unit or that server."
"Cynet fails to deploy the same technology in mobile devices."
"The solution lacks URL filtering."
"I think the technical support could be better. When I contacted them, I had to wait a week before getting an answer."
"An administration feature will be useful for Cynet."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"The price was fine."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"I feel it is fairly priced."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"The initial end-point cost may seem a little high (~$55/device/year) but when you look at the total peace of mind that the solution provides, with no reboots for updates, and negligible performance impact, it is well worth it."
"It is expensive, but not unreasonable."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"The solution's pricing is around the same as most EDRs but slightly behind some of the major ones."
"The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten."
"The monthly fee is $55 USD per user."
"The license price for this solution could be better. It's on the expensive side."
"The licensing part of the product is too expensive compared to other solutions in the market."
"it's not cheap, but I would rate it a three out of ten. If one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"Cynet is very affordable."
"Cynet is cheaper than other solutions in the market."
"My company's customers have to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs of the solution. Cynet is not expensive."
"The licensing for Cynet is yearly. The solution pricing depends on the customer, but it is not very expensive."
"This solution is expensive. I would rate the price as a three out of five when compared to similar products."
"The pricing was good."
"Cynet has a pay-as-you-go pricing model."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Blackberry Protect?
The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Blackberry Protect?
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we conta...
What is your primary use case for Blackberry Protect?
I am using CylancePROTECT as an active learning algorithm. We installed it on almost 20,000 servers and virtual machi...
When evaluating User Activity Monitoring, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
The support team that stands behind the detection and response. Is there adequate expertise and are they behind you ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cynet?
Cynet is not very costly. We can refer it to other customers because Cynet does not ask for additional costs for add-...
What needs improvement with Cynet?
One area where Cynet needs improvement is tamper protection for Mac and Linux agents. It currently has tamper protect...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Blackberry Protect
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Meuhedet, East Boston Neighborhood Health Center
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Cynet and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.