CylancePROTECT Reviews

I use CylancePROTECT for intrusion detection, so it's more of an antivirus. I also use its optics feature for live monitoring of every computer.

What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system.

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.

I want CylancePROTECT to have an automatic overruling feature in the future for specific situations. In my previous example, a colleague couldn't install Oracle VM VirtualBox because I didn't specify files and programs that CylancePROTECT should block. Sometimes, I want the solution to be less strict so that when a file or application comes from a well-known developer, CylancePROTECT should let it pass, regardless of what file it contains.

I've been using CylancePROTECT for five years.

CylancePROTECT is a very stable product, but in terms of updates and features, it's a letdown.

Scalability-wise, CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. SentinelOne is more scalable, though that could also be because it's bigger. For small businesses, CylancePROTECT is scalable.

Regarding scalability, I'm rating CylancePROTECT as five out of ten.

My colleagues said that support-wise, CylancePROTECT is slow to respond, and it's challenging to communicate with support or get a person on the phone. You can only contact support via email or chat when sometimes, you prefer calling support or speaking to someone via phone.

Email support is fine, but the level of support needs to be more in-depth, so I'm giving the CylancePROTECT support team a six.

Neutral

My company went with CylancePROTECT because my company has smaller companies or customers than enterprise customers. It's easier to deploy CylancePROTECT for smaller businesses, and it works better than SentinelOne, which is more for multinationals or enterprise businesses.

The setup process for CylancePROTECT was pretty straightforward. Setup-wise, it's an eight out of ten.

How long deployment takes depends on the client. For a bigger client, it might take around two weeks for every device to be deployed, but for a small business with a few employees, deploying CylancePROTECT might take a few days.

CylancePROTECT is worth the money, but I'm not sure of its exact price. I can't remember off the top of my head.

We evaluated SentinelOne.

At the moment, my company uses CylancePROTECT, but it's considering using SentinelOne in the future for enterprise clients.

Between five thousand to ten thousand people use CylancePROTECT. That's the total for my company and its customers. Specifically, sixty to seventy people in my company use the solution, with forty engineers and developers, myself included. In contrast, twenty to twenty-five people belong to sales, marketing, and management teams.

CylancePROTECT requires maintenance, but not much because my company has strict policies. For example, a colleague came to me a few days ago because he wanted to install Oracle VM VirtualBox but couldn't because CylancePROTECT wasn't allowing him to install it. In that case, I either have to acknowledge it or make some policy changes because CylancePROTECT is too strict.

To anyone looking into implementing CylancePROTECT, my first question would be, "Are you working in a small or big company?" My advice to you would be based on your answer. My next question would be how strict you want your antivirus to be because if you want it to be less rigid and with less maintenance, then I'd tell you to use CylancePROTECT. If you're looking for a stricter solution with more maintenance, go with SentinelOne.

My rating for CylancePROTECT is eight out of ten because its technical support could be better, plus it needs to update its software regularly. The solution also has several areas for improvement, but the team still needs to work on it. In general, as an antivirus with an optics feature, CylancePROTECT is very good but still has room for improvement.

My company is a CylancePROTECT partner.

I work in cybersecurity and with sensitive materials, so the solution is a proactive antivirus system.

CylancePROTECT is a proactive antivirus system, and I can't rely on a reactive system.

It actively monitors the behavior and activity of processes and will, without hesitation, terminate at root anything it determines to be suspect.

In essence, it will just terminate malware, even disguised malware. It will also occasionally terminate legitimate software that's trying to update, but at the same time, you can check in the dashboard. It has a very accessible and easy-to-read, and understandable record that tracks everything it does. It actively monitors what's going on.

So if you download the wrong software package, or you click the wrong link and run something, even if your computer does not detect something wrong, Cylance will notice that there is something off about it and will terminate it for you.

From 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.

It could be possible to make the UI for the admin dashboard more user-friendly or provide more explainer tooltips or more warnings before you change settings. The solution can do whatever you need, but you could annihilate your machine by changing the wrong setting, and you would have to start again.

Another quibble is that the endpoint visibility is a bit spartan. Because if a new policy is released from the admin console, you have to tell Cylance to check for a policy update, but when you do that, it does not tell you it has actually done that policy check, and there is no way of really knowing if it has actually updated. It would be nice to have a notification telling you whether or not the actions you have taken have actually been taken.

I have been working with CylancePROTECT for about a year.

I would rate the stability of the solution an eight out of ten. Since I started using the solution, I have only ever had one instance where it has had a problem.

We worked that out and updated it, and it was fine.

Once CylancePROTECT is set up, it is self-contained and is good to go.

I would rate the scalability for CylancePROTECT a ten out of ten since governments use the solution. The sky is the limit.

My organization has around 30 users.

My impression of customer support is that they take on advice and information. They provide a solution if you inform them of a weakness or an issue.

The initial setup is complex. The solution is military-grade, so I wouldn't expect anything less.

Setting it up at an enterprise level is relatively complex. But once set up at the administrative level, it is comparatively easy for the end user to set up.

Enrolling my phone with CylancePROTECT is a relatively easy process.

The solution is expensive.

I would rate CylancePROTECT an overall ten out of ten. With the evolution of malware, the dependence on a hash record renders a lot of antimalware inadequate, and a proactive antivirus system is necessary.

The solution is expensive but reasonable because it is a high-grade enterprise-level piece of software and is competitive for what it does.

I have not encountered any solution that is as good, effective, reliable, or powerful as this product.

The best use case is that it actually lifts off a lot of burden on customers, especially when they are deploying Cylance compared to other solutions. 

One of the best features of the solution is that it's easy to deploy. Second is the management part and the protection. It's way ahead of the other solutions compared to the signature-based one.

The base platform, the CylancePROTECT is a very good technology. If you upgraded that into a CylanceOPTICS, that will also help, however, CylancePROTECT itself can do a lot of protection.

There's a feature that they added called PERSONA. This is AI-based user behavior monitoring which is very useful.

It's straightforward to deploy.

If they can add more features on top of their Persona feature that would be ideal. It could also improve the UEBA feature of Cylance.

I've been working with the solution for around five years. I started using it around 2016.

As a cloud-based management platform, it's very stable. The version of the agent is very minimal in terms of updates. In terms of support, they have very broad support on several operating systems. The stability is quite high for this kind of solution.

It's a cloud-based management platform. It's very scalable. It's easy to ramp up the number of devices that you want to be managed by this kind of solution. It's highly scalable.

Our clients have actually upgraded and ramped up the number of licenses from the first time I deployed and introduced them to the solution. Most of our customers have expanded usage via the number of licenses they have.

I've used technical support in the past. The technical support, the SLA, if they can improve that aspect of the product it'll be much appreciated.

Neutral

I've also worked with CylancePERSONA over the past year or so. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not overly complex. 

The management and maintenance is also very easy. 

What I've heard from my customers is that Cylance, in terms of pricing, is a bit higher compared to other prominent solutions like Kaspersky and Symantec, however, that's about it in terms of what I know about the product pricing.

I'm working in a distributor company and we are actually selling CylancePROTECT.

The primary platform is a cloud-based solution. It is managed in the cloud. The one on-premise is called the hybrid platform where you can also do management locally on your site.

The best way to see the solution is to try it out. Try it first before worrying about pricing and see if it will meet your needs and how it works for your business.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. They simply need to improve the SLA, the response, and the Persona feature. If they do, I would rate it higher. 

We are currently using Blackberry Protect as our main endpoint solution, for threat prevention, script control, and scanning of malware. This is the core functionality of the Protect module.

We have the Blackberry Optics, which is the AI module of Blackberry Protect. It is called Blackberry Protect Plus Optics. The Optics feature logs all of the behavior of the servers. For example, when someone runs a PowerShell script and it blocks, it will learn the behavior and knows what to do the next time another user triggers that specific functionality.

It is currently deployed on-premises but our administration dashboard is in the cloud.

The agents are installed for our servers and reporting is to the Blackberry cloud.

This is still new to us. We have explored this solution and it fulfills our requirements, in terms of live malware detection.

We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting.

When it comes to the management of the application of agents, especially for us as an IT team the dashboard is much easier to manage in the McAfee solution.

We were looking to have a multi-factor authentication with the administration dashboard to log in, because it's cloud-based. 

There is no integration with Google Authenticator and other solution providers. 

We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard.

We have been using Blackberry Protect for just less than a year.

We are two versions behind the latest one.

Definitely, Blackberry Protect is a stable product. We have not had any kind of blue screen of death or crosstabs.

It's really lightweight in terms of resource consumption as well and in terms of memory and CPU consumption, it's quite low which is very good for us for other applications.

It's a scalable solution.

We have approximately 150 people in our organization who are using it.

We are also using Microsoft Outlook to block any kind of unwanted applications, which our users try to run in the background.

The initial setup is very straightforward. You just click on the MSI and provide the key to register for it to sync to the cloud dashboard.

We have a team of seven IT resources who have an account under Blackberry administration.

We pay our license on a yearly basis and have just renewed for two years.

We have not evaluated other options. For the time being, we are very satisfied with what we have.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

There is always room for improvement. I would rate Blackberry Protect an eight out of ten.

My company uses CylancePROTECT as an antivirus solution, installed on each PC.

What I like best about CylancePROTECT is its accuracy, as it doesn't give many false positives.

An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly.

I've been using CylancePROTECT for three years.

So far, CylancePROTECT is stable. I've never had any problems with it in terms of stability.

CylancePROTECT was deployed for my company with two hundred users, but I'm unsure if it can be deployed for more than that number and if it would still be scalable.

I only had to contact the technical support for CylancePROTECT once, and I don't have any complaints support-wise, so I'd give the support team a ten.

Positive

My company used Symantec before using CylancePROTECT, and it switched to CylancePROTECT because the update for Symantec was troublesome, plus it had some false positives. Symantec also couldn't detect some viruses, so the company decided to switch to a next-gen antivirus, such as CylancePROTECT.

The setup for CylancePROTECT was easy. You just had to do some clicking.

It took less than a month to deploy the solution, mainly three weeks, including installing tools on the endpoints.

An in-house team deployed CylancePROTECT for my company. I work for an IT company, so my company can do the deployment without help from an integrator or third party.

We've never calculated CylancePROTECT ROI.

My company is on a yearly CylancePROTECT subscription. Price-wise, the solution is slightly expensive, so I'd rate it as eight out of ten.

My company currently has two hundred CylancePROTECT users. That number could increase, but not significantly.

Two to three people took care of the deployment of CylancePROTECT.

I'd recommend CylancePROTECT to others looking into using it.

My rating for CylancePROTECT is eight out of ten.

We are mainly using this solution on our desktop PCs. It provides endpoint protection.

What I like most about Blackberry Protect is that it's easy to deploy. As an end user, you won't need to do anything.

I find the price for Blackberry Protect expensive, so that's an area for improvement.

I've been using Blackberry Protect for over two years.

I find this solution stable.

Blackberry Protect is a scalable solution.

We previously used Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, but we switched to Blackberry Protect because of company policy.

We implemented this in-house through our IT team.

The license price for this solution could be better. It's on the expensive side.

We're on a yearly license for this solution. I'm not sure, but I believe there isn't any extra cost, apart from the license fee.

We evaluated Symantec End-User Endpoint Security.

I'm using the latest version of Blackberry Protect.

I'm not responsible for the actual setup and installation of this solution. It was our IT team who was responsible, but I believe that the setup and installation was straightforward.

For the deployment and maintenance of Blackberry Protect, we used three technical guys. They were all from IT and they provided support internally, which included support for Blackberry Protect, its license, etc.

We have 100 users of Blackberry Protect.

I didn't have the chance to contact the technical support team for this solution.

I'm recommending Blackberry Protect to other people who want to start using it.

Blackberry Protect is a good solution, so I'm rating it an eight out of ten.

We use CylancePROTECT for import protection, which is why we got it. 

We switched from one product to another, believing this would be a better fit based on what we were informed, but it just didn't work as it should.

We have been dissatisfied with CylanceProtect and CylanceOPTICS and want to leave within the next several months. It just hasn't been an effective tool.

It was not effective. There were a lot of false positives, even when we use Adobe, and everybody uses Adobe, which is not a threat.

We are in the process of moving on to another solution.

I have been working with CylancePROTECT for just over two years.

We are an enterprise company.

I have experience with Blackberry Cylance.

I have some experience with CylanceOPTICS which is part of CylanceGateway.

Its setup is simple if you have a Windows device; it is executable. 

You start the program, make a few clicks, and then enter an extension code into it. Then it begins to mute services before installing. It's fairly simple, maybe five or six minutes.

We never implemented a single solution. We completed what is known as the university installation, and it does the bundle installation. The single-bite variant was never used. We used the bundle to make it easier.

We went through a third party initially to do the renewal, but we won't be renewing, we will move on to something else.

We received both. We prepared a quotation for a year. It is based on a calendar year. We spent a year on both Protect and Optics.

I would rate the pricing a three out of five.

I would rate CylancePROTECT a three out of ten.

The product is easy to implement and deploy.

I cannot control the agent. If the agent is installed on a machine, then it'll report back. If I have 15 machines on an agent, I cannot see that 15 machines unless I install the agent on each.

The solution is not stable right now. The performance isn't so good.

It's a hard product to maintain. 

I have found support to be quite bad. 

We want them to offer better pricing. 

I have not found the solution to be stable at this time. 

While it can scale, it's not scalable right now. 

The whole company is working with the solution. We have 30,000 machines with it.

Technical support is bad. I am not happy with the level of support they offer. We have no proper resolutions.

I previously used McAfee. At first, CylancePROTECT was better, however, now we are unhappy with its capabilities. In the end, they couldn't support our product

The solution is easy to deploy. However, it is hard to manage. 

I don't have to worry about maintenance. I don't handle any maintenance tasks. 

The pricing is not reasonable. I'm not sure of the exact number. However, we'd prefer if we paid less. 

I'm a customer and end-user.

I'd advise potential users that, if they think that the features will represent your organization or the company, then it is fine. Otherwise, don't do it.

I would rate the solution five out of ten.