Cynet Reviews

Our primary use case would be incident response.

Cynet has mostly helped with endpoint protection.

Its ability to revert back from a previous state is quite notable. This feature is particularly valuable because, for maintaining integrity, it can inspect the socket for any firewall modifications. In practice, it allows us to return to a previous configuration when everything was functioning correctly.

I like the integrity of the tool. 

There is room for improvement in terms of support. The support should be faster to respond. 

I have been using Cynet over a year.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. It is a very stable solution. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten for Cynet. It is very scalable. We have around five end users using this solution. 

We do plan to increase the further usage of the solution. 

The customer service and support are not very good. 

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with one being difficult and ten being easy to set up. 

The deployment takes around an hour. 

The deployment is agent-based. You need to install agent servers, sensors, and your candidate.

You would need an IT specialist for the deployment. 

Cynet is cheaper than others, so I would rate the pricing model a two out of ten, where one is the low price, and ten is the high price. 

Cynet is a really good tool, especially for the reports and its ability to outperform other security tools. I would recommend this solution for medium and enterprise businesses. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Cynet is light and transparent when downloaded. The product's data aggregation is also valuable since you can see everything you need on a page. 

An administration feature will be useful for Cynet. 

Cynet is stable and never crashes down. 

The solution is a cloud product and if I need to scale up, I need to buy more licenses. My company has 400 users for the solution. 

I have used SentinelOne. 

The product's setup was easy and we deployed it on the cloud. The tool's maintenance is handled by the partner. 

Cynet has a pay-as-you-go pricing model. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

I like the Cynet Correlator™ feature. 

Cynet fails to deploy the same technology in mobile devices. 

I have been using the solution for two to three years. 

I would rate the tool's stability a nine point three or nine point five out of ten. During the initial stages, we got some false positives. However, blacklisting and whitelisting them were easy. 

I would rate Cynet's scalability a nine out of ten. We have a few hundred users for the product. 

Technical support is very helpful and supportive. I have no complaints with respect to support. 

Positive

I would rate Cynet's setup a ten out of ten. The tool's deployment got completed in a few minutes. It is very intuitive and you need to connect it to the server. 

I did the deployment myself. 

Cynet is cheap. 

Cynet is the best EDR EPP XDR solution and I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

It is like an antivirus. Cynet agent is installed on our PCs, and we are using its latest version.

If some unusual activity happens on the network, such as I open administrator sessions in a short duration of an hour on many computers in the lab, it sends me an alert about my network saying that one user opened three, four, or five sessions in one hour. Similarly, if I try to play with the disk size on a computer, it will send me an alert, and it will also stop the operation.

Sometimes, it is necessary for me to make important changes to a hard drive of a computer, and because Cynet does not allow me to do that, I have to go to the console and remove the computer from the security group just for Cynet. After that, I have to wait for 10 or 15 minutes for that to take effect. I would like to be able to disable Cynet locally. I shouldn’t have to go to the console to find the PC and then take it out of the group and then add it again to the group. I should locally be able to disable Cynet on a computer with a password or something like that, but it is currently not possible.

I have been using this solution for about two years.

It is stable. A user can't see anything. It all happens in the background. It is not really heavy on a system. It is discrete, and a user can't feel it and uninstall it. It is pretty nice, and we like it.

It is scalable. It is used on all computers. We have about 150 PCs.

We used Symantec previously. I like Cynet more. It demands fewer resources. It is not resource-intensive.

It was easy. Most of the agents were installed automatically, but on some of the computers, the agents were installed manually. I had to configure group policies, and in the console, I had to put all the agents in a group.

I take care of its maintenance. It is really simple. When I put the new computer in a domain, it installs by itself and assigns a Group Policy Object (GPO).

I'm not dealing directly with Cynet in terms of administration. There is a security company between me and Cynet. They do cloud administration. I just add the agents in the right groups on the console, but the alerts are sent to me by this intermediate company. It is very simple for me. They just send me alerts on this computer saying that something is wrong with this service and if I can check it. I don't manage it, and we're paying for managing it.

We have definitely seen an ROI because we have very sensitive information, and we never had any viruses. It will be almost two years in autumn, and we never had any viruses.

It costs 18,000 per year, but we have the whole package with not only Cynet but also the Perception Point for emails. There are also some small security courses for our users.

It is an excellent product. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

It is being used for continuous protection. It is used as old standard antivirus and next-generation anti-malware using behavior and analytics. It provides defense against zero-days and living-off-the-land attacks.

I am absolutely up-to-date in terms of its version.

Advanced detection and protection against ransomware paired with SOC monitoring are the most valuable features. They have 24/7 SOC monitoring and file activity. It is a very robust tool.

I'm quite happy with them. Compared to other tools that I've seen, they're kind of ahead of the curve. So, it is hard to fault an organization that I see as a leader. Other companies spend a lot more money on marketing but don't really do much more in terms of protection.

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.

I have used it at a couple of different places I've worked. I started working with it back in 2016.

It is very stable. There were no negative interactions with any of our business applications or users. It has been quite good.

For our needs, scaling is not a big consideration.

They had an onboarding session with us. They walked us through all the features and gave recommendations for a startup versus more mature configurations. Now that we're getting started on a regular basis, I find them to be very responsive. They are available via phone or email and willing to do a shared desktop or video meeting when we need them.

I'm currently with a very small organization. We're using their cloud-based management system. So, there was no setup. We could have had an on-site server if we really wanted to, but we're small. We try to avoid that. 

We were up and running very quickly. It took however long it takes to distribute their endpoint software using a software distribution tool.

It is extremely affordable. I'll give it a five out of five in terms of price. It was half the cost of the next closest competitor, and the competitor didn't provide SOC services.

My head office selected to go with CrowdStrike, and I chose this over CrowdStrike.

Just give it a try. It'll speak for itself. 

I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

Cynet's most valuable features are laptop and server performance, internal network monitoring, and external firewall lock management.

Cynet could improve when a reverse proxy is being used to connect to the servers. There could be an easier configuration because it is not plug-and-play. 

If I compare Cynet with Trend Micro, DDI, and DDA. Cynet does not have a deep investigation in the network. I would like to see DDI and DDA into Cynet.

I used Cynet within the last 12 months.

The stability of Cynet is very good. However, there have been some bugs but in the updates, they improve the issues.

The scalability of Cynet is good.

Technical support is offered 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The support we have received has been very good. They have English and Hebrew support.

I rate the support of Cynet a five out of ten.

I have used other solutions, such as SentinelOne, which is not a bad solution but it has too many bugs. They provide good competition against Cynet. 

The MDR internet response, in Israel, does not have any support in Hebrew. They only have support for Poland, Romania, and England.

The initial installation of Cynet is very easy because we did not do it. It's the same installation on endpoints, such as laptops, and servers, or in virtual machines.

I would rate the implementation difficulty of Cynet a three out of five.

We have the vendor do the implementation of the solution.

There is an extra cost if you want the support of Cynet.

I rate Cynet an eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used for classical continuous monitoring of what's happening on the endpoint and identifying unknown threats and new threats. It provides us with a level of security.

The solution is very stable. We are very satisfied with the level of performance we get.

The scalability is quite good.

We have found the installation process to be simple. 

I'd like it to lean more towards an ad-based antivirus engine. We'd like something that makes it easier to manage specific points. 

I've used the solution for years at this point.

The stability of the product is great. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. it's reliable. 

We have found the product to be scalable. It's not an issue if you want to expand it.

We have more than 100 clients on the solution currently.

In terms of technical support, it is very good. We also have a prepared channel with them as we have the biggest signage salary in Italy. Usually, when we ask something, they're very quick and they give us a complete answer.

The initial setup is easy. However, it depends on what we find in the customer environment. Usually, they can't use automatic tools and need to do many things manually.

We have a team of 25 that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. There are more than ten people on the delivery team.

The bill we manage usually renews after three years. 

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been pleased with its capabilities. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. We've been please with its capabilities. 

We use it for endpoint detection and response. We also use it as a next-gen antivirus.

We have its latest version.

It is our main cybersecurity solution. It is our EDR as well as our XDR solution. It is also our antivirus system. We have had a lot of benefits. When a user clicks on a wrong link or activates a wrong macro in Excel, it has been able to stop such attacks. It has saved us a lot of recovery time.

We especially like the fact that it can stop any kind of attack. Its performance is also quite fast. There is a specific UI module that also works quite well.

The level of automation is very good because the majority of the time, it blocks the attacks without requiring anything from our side. The technicians don't have to do anything. They are just alerted about what happened. So, the user intelligence works quite well.

It is an endpoint agent, but they don't have a probe for checking the network traffic. They could improve from this point of view.

We have been using Cynet for three years.

Its performance is quite good.

They don't have any problem with scalability. They can manage 100 or 1,000 endpoints without a problem.

In our deployment, we have about 1,200 clients. We have covered all our endpoints.

We are currently using Cynet, but during this year, a lot of things can change. The new company might substitute Cynet with another solution. The new company has acquired another cybersecurity company. So, we might use another solution in the future. There is a high probability that we are going to change Cynet with an internal solution.

From a technical point of view, they have good support. We have a specific SOC service, and they are always ready to understand our situation or respond to our questions. So, their support is quite good.

Before Cynet, we had McAfee Antivirus. We changed because three years ago, we evaluated that McAfee was an old antivirus solution, whereas Cynet was a new EDR solution. It was exactly what we needed to have to improve our cybersecurity posture.

The setup is quite simple. You can have the first deployment in just two hours.

It was implemented in-house. Its maintenance involves patching. They have a new release every four months.

We have, of course, seen an ROI. The management has evaluated this solution in a good way. From the first year, everyone has evaluated its role in a good way.

It costs us 20,000 to 28,000 per year.

It is quite a complete solution. When they started three years ago, the product was not so mature. It was not so great, but last year, they added a lot of extra features. It is now complete.

Its setup is quite easy. In about two hours, you can have the first answers from your endpoint, and you can have the first understanding of your situation very quickly.

I would rate it a nine out of 10 because there is always scope for improvement.