Field Effect Covalence Reviews

We use the solution as a tool to protect our endpoints against cybersecurity threats. We also use it for monitoring network traffic at our office, specifically against denial of service attacks or other cybersecurity threats.

The Covalence agent that's been installed and running on all of our user's devices is great.

I get alerts if there's malicious activity or restrictions or if any suspicious activity should emerge. That allows me to reach out to that user and investigate further.

We like that it’s backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks and risks. It's very important. I've called upon them a few times. I don't need to every time. However, they've always responded extremely quickly - within minutes. They've helped me understand what the issue is and what a resolution could be.

For the most part, it's fairly easy to manage. On a scale of one to ten, I would probably say, with ten being minimal effort, zero being extremely difficult, I would put it around, you know, seven and a half or so.

We use the tagging of security threats such as actions, recommendations, observations, et cetera. For the most pressing issues, it's good.   

It doesn’t help us save time. However, it does help us be more focused on where we're spending our time.

The solution informs us of threats and how to address them. It has definitely helped with security. It gives recommendations on how to reduce our risk. That's very helpful, particularly when you have a more junior resource that's been dealing with the threat. The explanation and the description of the threat and the remedy suggested are very helpful.

I have had a couple of challenges around updates to the agents where it seems it doesn't automatically replace older versions. I've had to go in and manually remove them and do a reinstall, which is a bit cumbersome to do on all the devices. They should offer a silent install and update. I'm using InTune to install the agent on new devices; however, getting it updated to the new agent is difficult. Other than that, once it's up and running, it's pretty well a very easy advantage.

I find that sometimes it will send alerts a bit too quickly. For example, it will send me an alert if it detects that there is an older version of Windows running on a device. However, Windows forces us to update very quickly. We often get those alerts, and the updates just haven't had time to get installed yet.

As far as phishing emails in particular, it doesn't really help me in protecting against those. For that, I'm relying on Microsoft 365’s own tools. I get notified if somebody clicks on, for example, a suspicious link in an email; however, that's after the fact. I don't count on Covalent to filter out those potential emails from being delivered. We’re relying on Microsoft to do that.

We started using the solution almost two years ago. 

We haven't had any issues with crashing or downtime since we've been using it. 

We had a case where there was a power outage in the building. That created some alerts, however, when the power came back on, everything just reset, and we were fine. 

We contacted support during the initial setup and when we had to do an update. They were satisfactory. We had no complaints. 

Positive

We were not using a different solution previously.  

We do use their appliance to protect our network. However, we don't have any servers inside our network since all of our business apps are on the public cloud. 

I was involved with the initial setup of the solution. We did have some challenges getting it to work for the silent install that uses Intune. When we first tried to install it, we had difficulty getting it to do a silane install. And it took a while to get that resolved. Once we did, it worked fine, except we're having a similar kind of problem when there are updates to the agent that need to be installed. If we install it through, you know, a manual process, it works great. However, when you are trying to use Microsoft Intune, which is our endpoint device manager, there are some difficulties.

We had three members handling the installation process. 

Maintenance involves ensuring the latest version of the endpoint agent is installed on all devices. 

We handled the installation process in-house. 

The pricing is quite reasonable for the value we get out of the product.

We did look at other options, including Crowdstrike. The fact that Covalence was Canadian was important to us. The price point was attractive as well. 

We're customers and end-users.

I'd advise anyone to give it a serious look. It's a cost-effective solution compared to other options. However, they don't seem to be spending on marketing as you never hear about them really.

Look at all the features, if they're comparing it with other products, to make sure that they have everything required included. Make sure that you're looking at alternatives, considering various components. It's very easy to get confused between this agent, compared to, say, CrowdStrike's agent; however, if you need to add in the other components from CrowdStrike, do you have a comparable solution?

I'd rate the product nine out of ten. 

We are a start-up. I review the reports, but we have outside IT. They get all of the AROs, and they action them. I monitor it, and I am aware of what is happening, but I do not act on anything to respond to an error.

By implementing Covalence, we wanted to make sure that we are protected against the new cyber threats as best as we can. We wanted to preempt any attacks.

Covalence is backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks and risks. That is the whole point. There is somebody monitoring on a regular basis.

From my perspective, it is very easy. We just got it installed, and it just runs. We get regular updates or notices when there is something. For example, it could be as simple as out-of-date software, but it is a potential threat. It is an easy click-and-action. I like that we are constantly being made aware of those things and updating our systems.

Covalence provides comfort and a sense of security. We are aware that it is not perfect, and there are still some vulnerabilities, but it does provide a certain level of comfort. We could see its benefits after we saw how reporting worked and what was being reported, especially when we saw how quickly an incident was actioned. Within a year, we were feeling very confident in their ability.

Covalence helps our security team save time.

Covalence gave us recommendations on how to reduce our risk when we set it up originally.

It is very user-friendly. We have regular reports to see what is going on. 

It is quick. We did have a potential incident where a staff member clicked on a bad link. Within an hour, that account was locked, and it was actioned right away.

There are tags for security threats, but I only view them. I do not action anything. I just see what is happening. Sometimes, they are a little bit vague, and I am unsure what they mean, so I leave that to the IT experts. Overall, we are quite satisfied with their product and how it is working. I am kind of a middle person. I am not a tech person, so I do not really understand how it all works. It provides me comfort that somebody else is doing it because I do not understand it.

It has been a couple of years for sure.

As far as I know, it just runs.

I interacted with their technical support for an email check, which is a part of their service. I also have regular or periodic checks with our rep.

We were not using a similar solution to this level. We have always had outside IT and trusted that they were doing it, but we felt that there was a gap, so we added Field Effect.

Covalence did not replace any cybersecurity solutions for us. I am not sure if Covalence gives a single cybersecurity product that proactively protects all threat surfaces. We have other things in place for security.

In terms of the deployment model, I believe there is an agent on our server in the building, and it runs remotely from there.

I was not involved in its deployment. I was aware that people were installing it and showed them where the server closet was, but I physically did not touch anything.

It does not require any maintenance from our end.

It is a little pricey. It is a little on the high end, but we are continuing to use it. We signed the contract and have not canceled, so we find value in having it.

To a colleague who is interested in a cybersecurity solution but says they have never heard of the vendor Field Effect, the provider of Covalence, I would say definitely check it out. I would probably send them the onboarding material that I received when I first started with all of the information on how it works and why it is a benefit.

I would rate Covalence a nine out of ten. I am quite happy with it. It is very user-friendly, but there is always room for improvement. There may be things that I do not understand because I am not fully tech-savvy, but it is doing what it is supposed to be doing as far as I am concerned. I am happy with the product and the service.

We operate a security operations center for several companies. We rely on Field Effect Covalence as their primary endpoint detection and response platform, making it their main line of defense. Additionally, we leverage Covalence during incident response, especially for larger events. In such cases, we prioritize the rapid deployment of Covalence to the affected client, followed by engaging Field Effect's services to effectively contain the threat.

We wanted to proactively protect our clients, and deploying Field Effect Covalence gave us peace of mind knowing they were safe.

While we offer both cloud and on-site deployments, Field Effect typically recommends on-site devices for new clients. However, we're happy to accommodate cloud-based solutions for clients with specific reservations about on-site hardware.

The 24/7 expert monitoring for attacks and risks is crucial.

Covalence is straightforward to use and easy to figure out.

The tagging system is incredibly helpful, especially when action items are generated. As soon as these appear, I can immediately contact the client by phone or message to determine whether it's a false positive, an IT team member's activity triggering the flag, or a genuine threat. This information is invaluable, as relying on a standard user checking at random intervals could easily lead to missed threats. In my case, receiving both an email and a text message on my phone for each action item is a huge advantage. Time is of the essence when dealing with incidents, so the prompt notification through the action ARO is incredibly valuable.

Covalence offers a unified cybersecurity product that proactively strengthens all of our threat surfaces, simplifying maintenance and streamlining workflows. Having multiple tools consolidated into one platform saves a significant amount of time.

It helps save our security teams a few hours per day.

Covalence has helped replace other major EDR solutions for some of our clients.

Covalence provides helpful recommendations for reducing security risks, accessible through the "AROs" tab. These recommendations go beyond basic vulnerability scanning, which the platform also offers. It can pinpoint specific machines vulnerable due to outdated software or other issues, as well as highlight potentially suspicious behavior. For instance, I've encountered situations where a user had disabled multi-factor authentication, which raises security concerns. Therefore, Covalence is valuable for identifying specific vulnerabilities and suspicious behavior associated with individual devices or accounts. 

The AROs have been incredibly helpful. They not only provide a clear overview of activity but also act as a vulnerability scanner to some extent. However, with the vast amount of logs and other data we receive daily, it's still valuable to have a concise summary of everything happening.

We meet with the Field Effect team every month, and I understand that one potential project they're considering is a patch remediation component within Field Effect. The ability to directly patch machines would be a significant improvement, though I recognize it's a substantial undertaking. I believe they're exploring the feasibility of this feature, and its inclusion in the Covalence tool would be transformative, streamlining workflows and reducing reliance on additional tools.

I have a couple of suggestions for improvement. First, it would be great if we could remotely remove machines from the portal, either by uninstalling the agent remotely or completely deleting the machine entry. Currently, if a machine is upgraded, especially for our smaller clients who replace machines frequently, the old machine entry remains offline or otherwise inaccessible, cluttering the portal. Having a self-service option to remove these machines would be much more efficient than contacting support every time.

In the AROs tab, if we encounter multiple duplicate recommendations, it would be helpful to be able to select and resolve or dismiss them all at once. This would save time and effort when dealing with repetitive tasks.

I have been using Field Effect Covalence for eight months.

I haven't encountered any stability issues with Covalence, unlike the other tools we use. Throughout my time working with Covalence, I haven't experienced any downtime or problems accessing the software or web UI. I'm incredibly impressed with its uptime.

Covalence is highly scalable, accommodating small deployments of just ten clients up to larger implementations with 500 clients. This makes it ideal for businesses of all sizes, especially those with rapidly growing client bases like our smaller clients. Additionally, replacing hardware devices is easy by contacting the Field Effect support team.

For certain tags, if a substantial action item is received, I will first offer the client brief advice before internally contacting technical support for further assistance. Overall, I've been quite satisfied with the quality of support provided. While there have been a few instances of slightly slower response times than I'd prefer, the assistance offered has been excellent. When prioritizing tasks, the immediacy of action items, particularly important ones, takes precedence over mere recommendations or observations, as the former requires prompt attention.

Positive

Before adopting Covalence, we utilized CheckLite, a similar solution developed by another company section in collaboration with an external partner. While not as sophisticated as Covalence, it served us well until our recent acquisition. Following the buyout, we transitioned to Covalence due to its greater maturity, user-friendliness, and the exceptional support provided by its team.

The initial deployment was remarkably straightforward. We simply need to provide the person working on this project with information such as network resources, hardware types, and other relevant details.

Beyond Field Effect setting up the physical device and shipping it off to the client, only one person is required for the deployment.

We work directly with Field Effect and do all the implementations in-house.

While we evaluated other options like CrowdStrike, ultimately our decision went with Covalence. This was largely influenced by three factors: our CEO's prior experience, the evolving landscape of available tools, and the existing partnership we have with Field Effect.

I would rate Field Effect Covalence a nine out of ten. I've been extremely pleased with it overall. There are just a couple of minor areas in the web portal that could be improved for easier navigation. Apart from that, I've been incredibly happy with the service.

No real maintenance is required for Covalence.

For someone unfamiliar with Field Effect, I'd start with a quick internal product demo. This highlights key features and limitations, followed by directing them to their website and comprehensive support docs. Finally, I'd share my positive firsthand experience with the software.

For large-scale deployments of Covalence, having an RMM solution or another multi-machine deployment method is crucial. While manual installation is feasible for smaller clients, efficiently managing broader deployments requires automated tools. Otherwise, the setup process itself is straightforward.

We are an MSP and have integrated Covalence as a core offering across all of our SMB clients.

Covalence is deployed to monitor the physical network, end-points, cloud (Microsoft 365/Duo/SalesForce/Azure/Google), and DNS filtering.

Covalence allowed us to replace and consolidate a number of tools which provided immediate cost savings. Additionally, Covalence filled knowledge gaps and offloaded a big portion of monitoring activity. Finally, everyone feels more secure now knowing professionals and the right tools are in place.

We like the 24/7/365 SOC. Hackers are trying to breach a business when they least expect it - that's often at night, weekends, and holidays. Covalence never sleeps or misses a second of monitoring. 

Over the last four years, there have been so many improvements and additions that I honestly can't think of anything else, aside from more third-party integrations with other MSP tools.

I've used the solution for three or four years.

The business is extremely stable. They have great funding and are fully staffed.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

We handled the setup in-house.

We offer Field Effect Covalence as a cybersecurity package for our customers primarily for on-prem networks and cloud-based storage.

Field Effect Covalence has been able to detect zero-day Trojans almost immediately after installation on client systems, which our previous solution was unable to do. The network traffic monitoring has also been able to flag any potential issues before they become a problem. This has been a great help in monitoring issues with network configuration, such as DNS errors and port configuration.

The most valuable feature is the network traffic monitoring function.

The cost of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for four months.

I give the stability a ten out of ten.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

We have 60 people using the solution in our organization.

We previously used SentinelOne Vigilance but switched to Field Effect Covalence due to its more robust offering of cloud, cloud storage protection, and live agents that triage the alerts and send them to us.

The cost of the solution is high.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

People should be prepared for the solution to quickly identify a lot of things that have gone unnoticed for some time. Field Effect Covalence is an excellent solution.