CrowdStrike Falcon Complete MDR Reviews

The solution did a good job of preventing ransomware. It is used for behavioral analysis. For instance, if something appears to be suspicious then the solution blocks it.

If someone is using the old Microsoft Office and the system is not updated then CrowdStrike takes action on behalf of the operating system. So it is not only going above the application level but also the operating system level.

The analysis of the investigation of the incident could be easier. Offline scanning can be included in the next release. 

Moreover, Crowdstrike should think about making the price cheaper.

I have been using it for one year.

It is a stable solution.

The solution is scalable. Presently, in the company, there are three hundred users, and in the group, there are one thousand users.

The technical support team is in the middle range and not very good. We have a dedicated team from CrowdStrike working for us; it is called the watch service. 

We also subscribe to EDR Plus watch service. So we have a team from CrowdStrike always monitoring things before it happens.

Previously, I used Carbon Black EDR for three years, and I was a very happy user, but their technical support was not very relevant, so I switched.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment took around two weeks. We have only one engineer helping with the deployment.

There has been a Return on Investment. We have been working with two incidents, and the support team was really helpful from their side.

We need to pay a yearly subscription fee, which is expensive compared to others.

Anyone using CrowdStrike should ensure that they have the watch service. Though I do not remember the name of the service, it says Crowdstrike engineers are also monitoring.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for our exchange servers, key directory servers, and radio servers.

We currently have three users but may expend in the future depending on strategy and budget.

The endpoint detection and response is very valuable.

The solution should be lighter because it currently uses a lot of computing sources.

I have been using the solution for six months.

The solution is definitely stable so stability is rated a nine out of ten.

The solution is definitely scalable so scalability is rated a ten out of ten.

We contacted technical support once and there was a delay from that SOC center. We haven't contacted support again.

We previously used McAfee but were facing a RAV somewhere in a couple of servers.

The pricing is a little bit expensive for our region.

It is not expensive to get implementation assistance from partners.

Our company is a dealer for Trend Micro so we are more focused on their products.

I can't compare the solution's features to Trend Micro because I can't get them to work in the same environment.

I recommend using the solution. Nowadays, there is a cyber warfare so a bit of protection is important. I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We are using CrowdStrike Falcon Complete for fileless attacks, ransomware, and zero-day attacks.

The most valuable feature of CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is the lightweight design, easily manageable portal, and minimal IT maintenance required.

CrowdStrike Falcon Complete could improve by having advanced features, such as SOC, and HDR. There would have been a lot of processes involved.

I have been using CrowdStrike Falcon Complete for approximately three years.

CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is a stable solution.

The scalability of rowdStrike Falcon Complete is good.

We have approximately 500 computers using the solution. We have approximately 1,200 people using the solution.

I have not contacted the technical support from CrowdStrike Falcon Complete.

The initial setup of CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is easy. The time it took for the deployment was approximate one week for 500 computers.

We did the deployment of CrowdStrike Falcon Complete in-house.

There is a license needed to use the solution. The price of the solution is fair.

We evaluated McAfee and Symantec before choosing CrowdStrike Falcon Complete.

Symantec is complicated and it did not have as many features when compared to CrowdStrike Falcon Complete. McAfee is also a very complicated solution.

If you use this solution your environment will be safe.

I rate CrowdStrike Falcon Complete an eight out of ten.

The most valuable features of CrowdStrike Falcon Complete are the modern and intuitive capabilities, and because it is cloud-based it is much easier to adopt and roll out to the environment.

I have been using CrowdStrike Falcon Complete for approximately one year.

CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is a stable solution.

The scalability of CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is good.

We have approximately 1,000 users using this solution in my company. We have plans to increase our usage.

The support is good from CrowdStrike Falcon Complete. We call them and we have a response immediately. They could improve by increasing their knowledge.

I rate the support from CrowdStrike Falcon Complete a four out of five.

Previously used Symantec Endpoint Protection. We switched to CrowdStrike Falcon Complete because we had a lot of real threats that passed through the antivirus and at the same time, we were not getting the right technical support from Symantec.

The setup of CrowdStrike Falcon Complete was easy. We have not yet completed the full implementation, it is still ongoing and we hope to finish it in two to three months. 

We had some initial proof of concept and did it on test PCs and test servers. We are moving it into production. We are doing small steps every week.

We had support from CrowdStrike Falcon Complete available during the implementation.

I rate CrowdStrike Falcon Complete an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for endpoint and server protection.

The reporting for this solution could be improved. This would make it more proactive in showing what happens during enrolment.

This is a stable solution and we have not experienced any issues. 

This is a scalable solution and we have more than 100 PCs.

The technical support is good. All it depends on the rules you have in place for the engagement of support.

The initial setup is easy and straightforward. It is easy because we set it up for about 500 endpoints in two day or three days. 

We have experienced ROI using this solution. The value is clear when you are able to stop a ransomware attack or other threats. All the money that you put into this protection is the money you save by preventing a problem.

 We pay 40,000 euros to use this solution. 

The engagement rule of this solution is fundamental to its use.The rule you put in place can determine how effective this solution is for your business. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

I would say it is for endpoint security, malware, antivirus, and advanced threat monitoring.

I would say it secures the edge for customers more than they were before. It makes them more secure.

I think the AI and the analytics around stopping threats as they come in and learning as threats happen is probably the biggest selling feature. 

I think the pricing is a little high. As of recent, their MITRE scores were not as good as in years past. I would like to see them integrate Humio, which is their SOC or their SIM platform. I would like to see them integrate that into a single solution.

I have been working with CrowdStrike Falcon Complete for the past year and a half.

The stability is great.

They are very scalable even large organizations use CrowdStrike Falcon Complete.

I would say it's pretty good for the most part. I would give it an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is pretty easy. You are given an implementation specialist. Deployment usually takes a couple of weeks for a bigger organization. For a smaller organization, it could take a couple of days. For just the straight endpoint protection product, you are probably looking at eight dollars a month per user. If you're doing the Falcon Complete with monitoring and the SOC, you're probably looking at eighteen or nineteen dollars a month per user.

A lot of them used MacAfee, Silance, or a couple of other solutions. There's more AI and more built into it.

I would rate CrowdStrike Falcon Complete a nine out of ten.

When work-from-home scenarios started in March 2020, during the pandemic, in the month of April, we were actually going through some POCs and had one ransomware attack on one of the client sites. We had to deploy the solution immediately, which actually helped us find out or not how it worked. Proactively, we could identify some threats in the environment and act on them. We were virtually identifying items and getting notifications, as well as seeing the availability of the intra. That was very helpful for the entire team.

The solution is very nice. It's got multiple products for multiple features and enabled multiple settings, which helped my team and the organization is also in a way better way. Since it was lockdown the last two years, when the entire organization went to working from a remote location, the earlier solutions, what we had, were of no use. We were most concerned about security over the cloud. Carbon Black has helped us handle that.

Before we used to support multiple clients. We had to have some connectivity to the client's environment via Citrix or something. To access any of our solutions was a challenge when most of them were on-prem. Those were challenges for all of us. Now, most of the world has gone to the cloud. That actually helped us. Obviously, CrowdStrike was a different experience altogether.

I personally work on advanced threat hunting and identifying possible malicious activity or the possible threat in our environment which is getting easier earlier. Symantec Engine Protection, for example, gives you known reactive reports where you get stuff from either SIM or some soft team to help us on finding out probably the path for the attack. However, CrowdStrike is better at hunting threats and catching them early.

There's less workload on the Endpoint. After moving to CrowdStrike we never have this issue of systems getting overutilized by any of the security tools. That was one of the biggest advantages for it.

CrowdStrike has multiple parameters of components in the same console, which includes your vulnerability scanning. It has access to, or rather, we can integrate with, our existing SIM technology or SIM tool. The information that gets passed on the SIM control, the soft tool data site or any other tool is very limited. I had to actually provide the control access to my soft team so that they could drill down if needed.

The information was get passed on from Falcon control to CrowdStrike and it was very limited. It was acting as more of an alert only. For any further deep-dive analysis, we had to log in on the console itself. 

CrowdStrike has multiple parameters. For example, my vulnerability scanning team is a separate team who works on different tools altogether. If I need to give them access to my console I just need to provide them read-only access or kind of an admin access for VA scanning.

I had to make some customized access that can be provided to different teams on the same console. As a VA team member, if I login to the console with my credential I should be able to see the things which I am working upon. I don't need to see all other tile stack tabs. I should be able to provide some kind of customized access or other kind of access control for the console.

Microsoft Defender has one good option which is called the ASR rule. It basically allows the machines to be onboarded to different consoles, which analyzes the process of it and summarizes it in a single console. Obviously, the number of incidents of the event are very huge. It takes about a month or so to evaluate. However, after the evaluation completes, you can actually fine-tune what should not be present in your automation. Which you can set up and get rid of it. It would be nice if this product had something similar. 

I've used the solution for two years.

The stability is very good. It does not have any kind of payload on the endpoint, and we don't need to compromise with system performance. The legacy tools used to have this agent needed to be deployed and consumed a lot of system resources. In terms of performance, this tool was an improvement on the legacy.  The capabilities of CrowdStrike as a tool are fantastic.

We are working with about 18,000 endpoints and about 2,000 servers.

The scalability was really good. It covers most of the recent operating systems I would say in India, although most of our customers are using Microsoft operating systems only. In terms of my international clients who have different operating systems, including Mac, Linux, or Unix, this works. CrowdStrike has the maximum availability for all possible and the latest operating systems. With other tools. we didn't have that level of flexibility.

Technical support was fantastic, however, frankly speaking, we barely had a chance to get in touch with the technical support as CrowdStrike has a fantastic health portal within that console. There were a couple of scenarios where we went to them as some kind of alert that CrowdStrike was publishing it to the customer only. They had some specific name for those alerts. Those used to get sent to the customer's end only. Being automation as security, CrowdStrike has a policy to provide the information only to the registered customers only. Obviously, the licenses are issued to the customer. However, the licensing policy was limited in that we were kind of a vendor, or rather, a mediator between the customer and the OEM and we fell through the cracks. 

I would say in my earlier solution, we used to just provide the license number. If the license number were verified, we would get all types of support. 

Overall, the support team was really good. They are more capable of understanding the other challenges and would then provide the solution.

Mostly, we were providing all the technical support to the customer. The licenses were installed with the customer's name. We were slightly lacking as the details that OEM was providing were direct to the customer and we were being skipped. At the same time, we used to struggle to get the details and updates or more input from the OEM from CrowdStrike. 

Positive

We moved from Symantec Endpoint to CrowdStrike.

The initial setup was slightly complex although it's an easier solution. It took us about a month to understand the entire process of the console.

Within a month we were able to train our members to a certain level and within a six-month span, all members actually became familiar for the technology.

We had some challenges from the client environment as well. That was expected as we were ruling out Symantec as well at the time. Concurrently, we were moving out of Symantec and deploying through the CrowdStrike agent. We were also doing the policy fine-tuning, which took a slightly longer time as the customer had their own developed applications and tools for finding their hashes. We added features like device control, app control. Those parts took slightly longer, however, it was still quicker than the legacy solution.

We have two people available to handle maintenance. 

The deployment was handled by my technical team only. Internally, we had eight team members deploying it. They were using a big fix as a deployment tool to deploy this agent on all the clients. I was leading the admin part of CrowdStrike. We had to involve the patch management team who could push a particular script on all the endpoints to onboard them. Most of the endpoints were working remotely and luckily we fixed everything there in the cloud which was making our life easier for onboarding scripts on the client.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon Complete with Bitdefender, I would say that Bitdefender was comparatively easier to use, deploy and maintain, especially for my technical resources.

CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is the same as any other EDR program. It provided full antivirus protection. Also, it provided a little bit of the ransomware and other protections you would see within the Bitdefender field. The content control wasn't as intuitive and easy to use as Bitdefender.

The most valuable thing in the solution was the analytical AI to detect viruses faster than Bitdefender.

The simplicity of CrowdStrike Falcon Complete's content control and firewall management should be improved. Ransomware protection of the solution needs to be improved.

I have been using CrowdStrike Falcon Complete for six months before switching to Bitdefender, which is easier to maintain.

It's a stable application. It is one of the most stable out of all the other market applications, especially if you're talking about within the EDR platform.

If you don't watch the training videos for CrowdStrike Falcon Complete, it's not as intuitive as Bitdefender.

I have had a very limited experience with the customer support team. So, their response time was far worse than any of the other vendors. So that was probably one of the driving factors and the reason why the adoption process didn't go so well, which is because of their onboarding process, during which they used to take a day to get back to assist you. I would have understood if they had taken a couple of hours to help us, but waiting for a day wasn't acceptable.

I rate the initial setup a four on a scale from one to ten, where one is very difficult.

One can see a return on investment because it does protect one's core environment.

CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is very expensive in comparison to Bitdefender.

CrowdStrike Falcon Complete is probably one of the best software out there if you're looking at it. But if you're on a budget and you want to get something within the same price level, I would look at Bitdefender. Then if I added a worst-case scenario, I would go to Sophos or SentinelOne. In my industry, the cost is a huge variable. Though it's a good product, it's not easy and intuitive. I have to remember that my technical resources to offload my work are in the Philippines. So I need to have something that's very simplistic. I have helped desks in the Philippines, Malaysia, Mexico, and Singapore. When I choose an application, I have to consider the intuitiveness of that application and also the multiple language barriers. So, that is where prospects fail, which is during the adoption process.

I rate the overall solution a seven or eight out of ten.