Field Effect MDR Reviews

I am with an IT MSP or IT Managed Services Provider. We have clients who allow us to provide their IT services. We provide services for desktop support and all the way up to network administration, technical projects, and so forth.

We use Field Effect MDR for our clients as well as for ourselves, so we use it internally as well as resell it to our IT MSP clients.

Field Effect MDR is backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks and risks. It is extremely important and relevant to us. Field Effect or at least the core team, comes out of offensive security with nation/state actions. That is very practical knowledge. Being able to take that and understand both from the offensive side and the defensive side is valuable. Knowing how to counter those offensive acts and how to anticipate them puts them in a great spot to understand the cyber landscape. We are able to stay on top of trends within that cyber landscape. Because they have intelligent sources or habits that they have developed from their history, it is very effective. We have a lot of trust in the leadership of Field Effect, the line managers, the SOC in charge, the forensic teams, and the incident response teams. We have very high confidence that our interests are highly regarded by them, and they are trying to protect our business, our interests, and our clients. They are also able to steer us in great directions. 

Even though they have such deep industry experience, they are willing to collaborate and listen. This is something that I would not have expected from a team like Field Effect. On the partnership side, we have used other top-tier EDR or MDR products. The products are great, but the partnerships in some cases have been just average. In some cases, they have been antagonistic, so from Field Effect, I was not expecting much, particularly having learned about their background. However, when we got working with them, it was just a revelation of how open they were to our situation and our particular needs, which are very different from their own priorities. They have been willing to work with us within reason. They have a development roadmap that they have to follow, but whenever we needed critical things to make Field Effect MDR a part of our core business and a successful part of our core business, they were very willing to listen. In many cases, they also acted on the requests. It has been a fantastic and very effective partnership.

We use its tagging of security threats as actions, recommendations, or observations. It is critical. We have used a lot of platforms, We have used the second-tier ones and also the top-tier ones in Magic Quadrant. The main issue with all of those platforms is noise. How do you improve the signal-to-noise ratio so that you are not spending a lot of your senior security analyst's time triaging non-actionable tickets, events, or alerts and they can focus on those truly actionable things that might require some level of direct incident response? With other platforms, including other top-tier platforms such as SentinelOne or CrowdStrike, we would get a lot of false positive notifications, and cutting through the noise was difficult. With Field Effect, because they use the ARO system of actions, recommendations, and observations, they have severity levels within each of those bands. I am not sure, but I believe there are five bands between each of those. We use a system called ConnectWise PSA as our ticketing system, so we are able to insert workflow rules and other automation assistance so that we can do some pre-filtering of the alerts to make sure that we direct all the high-priority notifications to our SOC team. We can either auto-close lower priority or lower severity notifications because they are non-actionable or are more informative, or we can funnel them to our regular help desk. A notification about your web browser being out of date does not need to go to the SOC. That can go to the regular service team to help walk the client through an update or do the update for them and things like that, so AROs are critical. It definitely allows us to maximize our limited and expensive resources so that we are focused on truly actionable things and not waste time on false positives.

As of now, Field Effect MDR gives us a single cybersecurity product that proactively protects all our threat surfaces, but who knows what may happen in the future. Field Effect MDR is holistic. With this one product, you get the host-based stuff. You get the network appliance. You get cloud monitoring. You get the DNS firewall. It is a much simpler product to handle from a billing perspective. From an account management perspective, the full version of Field Effect MDR is effective and easy to manage. They also have other versions, but the full product version is a one-stop shop. There is an add-on that they have probably introduced over the last year or maybe six months. It is for cloud retention. Field Effect MDR in many aspects is a SIEM, but they have not exposed all the traditional capabilities of SIEM, namely the dashboarding side or the user-facing side. It also lacked the ability for a SIEM to be a generic log aggregator or a log ingestion sync of any source of log data. They have now added that capability where you can add on log retention services if you need it for compliance or insurance or just your own digital forensics requirements. By default, it retains its own telemetry for 90 days, but if an organization wants to retain logs for 360 days or longer for compliance and data retention, they have a service for that. That is an add-on, but the core platform with its 90-day retention is usually acceptable to the majority of our clients.

Field Effect MDR most certainly helps our security team save time. It does that passively via ARO classification. The Field Effect SOC is doing its job through machine learning, human analysts, and other heuristics to make sure that events are categorized as best as they can. We can leverage their deep experience, which makes it much easier for my team. When we get an alert via Field Effect MDR, it is already packaged as an action, a recommendation, or an observation. When we get an action of medium or higher severity, that automatically goes to my company's SOC for some triaging and analysis to determine whether we need to spin up an incident response or what the proper response is to that notification. Lower-scored items, such as observations, recommendations, and low severity or priority actions, go to a SOC coordination team, which will also do some less technical triage to classify them, or it will be handled by some of our automations. The fact that AROs are being so effectively and correctly targeted allows us to focus our most senior, most expensive, and most skilled resources on things that actually matter.

We also gain efficiencies because the Field Effect SOC is collaborative. We do not just get an ARO. We are also able to initiate communication. If we have an action or event that we want to follow up on, be it an action, recommendation, or observation, we can request help. If my company SOC needs some guidance because we are not quite sure, or it is on the bubble of being actionable versus non-actionable and we want a second opinion before we close a ticket or spin up an incident for the response team, we can request help from the Field Effect SOC. They collaborate with us and explain the logic behind why they classified something like this. They listen to our points, perspectives, and considerations. They work with us to figure out whether it is something that we need to worry about, or it is something that we can defer or ignore. That is extremely helpful. With some of our other partnerships on technology products, including security products, it has been very difficult to get this level of effective collaboration from the vendor. That has been fantastic. That has allowed us to accelerate our plans. Initially, we were thinking about using Field Effect MDR only for certain clients who have purchased a higher tier or premium security service, like an MSSP service specific to security and compliance. However, given how scalable Field Effect MDR is through those efficiencies built into the platform, into their classification system of events, and indirect staff augmentation via their Field Effect SOC, we have now made Field Effect MDR the standard security platform for all of our clients, even the ones who are only on core IT support plans.

Field Effect MDR informs us of the threats that matter and how to address them. AROs are very detailed. A lot of security platforms provide that detail, so I do not know if that is especially unique in the Field Effect's case, but it is certainly effective. AROs are very well-detailed, and they describe which event triggered the alert. They explain why it is of interest but not an actual problem. They also detail the steps to remediate, mitigate, or dismiss a particular alert. They are very effective from that perspective.

They also provide us with bulletins. We have been lucky so far. None of our clients have been subject to any sort of rising threat. However, we would not necessarily know about it unless we are paying attention to security forms and other information sources. Field Effect is one of those sources. When they start to see a negative trend, they alert their community. As a channel partner of Field Effect, we get alerts, warnings, or notifications on those emerging threats. We can then alert our SOC and pay attention to some of the indicators of compromise that might not be flourishing into a full attack but are indicative of attack precursors. Those advanced alerts of emerging threats are key. Field Effect is attempting to keep us informed as a channel partner. I do not know how true that would be for a direct customer of Field Effect.

As a channel partner, we also get visibility into their development roadmap. We have influence over that roadmap. Understanding what is coming down the line in terms of feature enhancements, feature improvements, new features, new capabilities, and new services is great for us. We are a decently sized IT MSP with a growing set of MSSP services. We cannot always turn on a dime, so advanced notice, particularly in terms of forthcoming items, is very key. It allows us to help make sure that our various teams—technical teams on the SOC or the service delivery side, client-facing teams such as our account management teams, our VCIOs, our VCSOs, and marketing team—are working in a highly synchronized or collaborative manner. They can make our new services and offerings as successful as possible with minimal friction in our particular marketplace.

It is hard to take them in isolation. It is a security product, so it is all about defense and depth. You cannot be monolithic, so you have to be holistic, and that is what Field Effect MDR is. It starts with their host-based agents, their EDR agents, which are very capable, but those are bolstered by network compliance, which does network intrusion detection. We are getting visibility over the network, not just for those hosts that have a Field Effect EDR agent but also things like the Internet of Things, guest networks, or rogue devices. We definitely have visibility into all network traffic, which is very cool. They also provide a DNS firewall, so that is pretty key. These days, with zero trust, you have to assume a breach at some point. It is sad but true. Even folks like CrowdStrike, who are not necessarily getting compromised, are falling victim to their own internal processes, so having multiple layers of protection is certainly beneficial. With a DNS firewall, even if something were to go haywire, such as an intruder breaches the perimeter and gets onto an endpoint, or somehow the endpoint itself fails to be effective, we still have the ability to block those command and control hubs. That is pretty key.

Cloud monitoring is another thing that we found valuable in addition to host endpoint protection. We also have cloud monitoring in addition to the host-based agent, the secure DNS, the network intrusion detection, and the network compliance that sits on-prem monitoring all traffic. We are able to ingest all the events for all the top services, such as Microsoft 365, GCP, AWS, Dropbox, Salesforce, and ServiceNow, and make sure that we are looking at the entire distributed footprint of an organization and not just a particular endpoint or a particular office, so it is very comprehensive.

On top of all of that telemetry being captured, we have the Field Effect security operation center. Their SOC analysts are awesome. They are very flexible in terms of particular rules, which might change from organization to organization. They are able to take those particular provisioning or service definitions and still remain very responsive and according to our service level agreements. We found their SOC to be incredibly engaging. That is on the service delivery side.

We are a channel partner of Field Effect. We deal with a lot of products, but Field Effect has certainly distinguished itself as being a stellar partner. They are not just providing us with fantastic products, which are highly effective, they are also helping us. They are helping our clients. Their partner team or their marketing team helps us with go-to-market activities. It has been a fantastic relationship.

The interface is perhaps the weakest part of the entire platform, and that does not mean that it is deficient. It is just not as optimized and as efficient as other aspects of the platform. Given their background of coming from the offensive security side of things, understanding how attackers are going to operate, and having played that role in their previous careers, they have built a great platform that understands what to look for. Their threat detection, rules, and their correlation engine are amazing. They have very high accuracy. That is built throughout the platform. From the technology side, because of their experience, they know what to prioritize in terms of their development roadmap, so they get the best features out as quickly as possible, which is fantastic. There is comfort in knowing that our protected environments will be well safeguarded by the entire platform, including their security operation center.

The weak point, particularly as an MSP, because we have multiple IT clients, is that we need a multi-tenant type of interface. We need a single pane of glass that allows us to manage all of our clients, including our own tenant for our own internal use. Their web console has seen some development over the past couple of years. Their focus was perhaps not as much on the user-facing side of things as it was on the core technology or the actual cyber defense side of things, so we have had some points of challenges over the past couple of years. Over the last six months, however, there have been some pretty drastic positive changes to the user interface for the web console or the web admin console. The interface is a lot better, but there are still some gaps that we would love to see getting filled. For example, we would like to be able to export all data grids to CSV so that we could bring them into some other format to do data analysis outside of the web console. That is still a bit hard to do. However, they have added so many other quality-of-life, user efficiency, and multi-tenant management features over the last six to nine months that the interface is now much better. It is a highly usable interface now.

Field Effect MDR is a compelling platform because it is not monolithic. It is distributed, and it is layered. You have the host, DNS, network, and cloud. They have something called SEAS or Suspicious Email Analysis Service, which is awesome because everyone is suspicious of emails, perhaps even multiple times per day. If you multiply that by multiple clients and the number of users per client, you can imagine the volume of tickets that we get within our company to know if it is a phishing email. Having that service from Field Effect where they ingest an email reported by an end user and do the analysis to determine whether to trigger some sort of incident response action or to ignore it because it is legitimate. Having that is amazing. Where they have a gap currently is that they have their telemetry coming from so many different areas of an organization. Field Effect MDR is basically collecting all the data that a SIEM does. I guess to the Field Effect SOC, Field Effect MDR is a SIEM, but a lot of those SIEM capabilities are not fully exposed to end customers or MSPs, such as MSSPs or MSPs like my company. It would be awesome if somewhere on the development roadmap, they continue to evolve the platform and expose more of the native SIEM functionality so that it is available to end customers and not just to the Field Effect SOC.

The UI and SIEM capabilities are two main things that I would love to see. That would make it a slam dunk. They would then cover everything. They have a holistic security defense platform. They have log retention. They have MDR capabilities. Those are massive checklist items in an organization's cyber defense footing. An organization looks for things like compliance assessments, cyber insurance, and cybercrime coverages.

I would certainly love Field Effect to continue to be very judicious in expanding its precious development resources in the pursuit of market competitiveness. I imagine their competitors seeing the success that Field Effect MDR is having with their holistic approach, so I would expect more of that from their competitors. I see them providing a one-stop-shop type of solution. It would be incumbent for Field Effect to continue driving the initiative by expanding its universe of products and services. It would be interesting to see other elements from them that lead to good cyber hygiene. As an IT MSP or MSSP, one of the big challenges for us is a simple thing like patching. We have tools where we can pretty confidently patch operating systems such as Microsoft Windows, Linux, and macOS, but we are not able to patch third-party applications with a high success rate. That is due to a host of causes, some of which are user-driven but a lot of them are platform-related. It would be awesome if Field Effect started to include features like patch management into the mix so that we could leverage the ubiquity of Field Effect MDR to tackle one of our highest service delivery challenges. We are already using some third-party application patching tools, but even with multiple of them in play, we are far below our desired success rate for monthly application updates. I would love to have another layer to that mix to help improve our patch compliance rate. 

I have recently been exposed to an application allowlisting platform. It is very capable, and it is solving some specific needs, particularly for companies that are trying to maximize their cyber insurance spend. If you have application allowlisting deployed, some site insurers are willing to provide more coverage or reduce the premium for those clients. They see that as a very positive or defensive posture and are willing to incentivize it. Currently, Field Effect MDR does not have any form of application allowlisting capability. It would be interesting to have it added to the platform in some fashion. That would be great. The host agent in Field Effect MDR is kernel-based, so it is already well-positioned to do things like application allowlisting.

I believe it has been just over two years.

You have occasional issues with a new hire who might be just out of training, but that is very rare. The majority of times that I contact Field Effect support, I get an analyst who not only seems to be very knowledgeable about our particular deployments but is also aware of the platform and the landscape. The analyst is able to create a nice little intersection of all of those to help provide the best direct guidance for a given situation. I found them to be very effective and responsive.

They follow the sun. If we get after-hours alerts, we are still able to get hold of Field Effect SOC analysts to help us triage or respond to high-sensitivity or high-severity events. Because we are a channel partner of Field Effect, in addition to contacting support directly, I often copy our partner success manager to keep him in the loop regarding what is going on, so we usually get a very good and fast response from Field Effect support. When we have supercritical issues that require immediate and most senior attention, it is awesome to have a champion within Field Effect who knows us. We meet with our partner success manager at least monthly, but often, it is biweekly. It is great having a champion within Field Effect who can immediately escalate issues important to us or our clients. They are great, and they are greater when we get our partner rep involved.

In terms of rating, I hate giving out tens because it does not leave room for growth. I am going through SOC 2 and HIPAA compliance certification right now. I just went through this exercise of documenting all of our vendors and all of the systems that we have running. There are over a hundred, and some of those are packaged applications that we just buy. We are just using them off the shelf. With many of them, however, it is a channel relationship where we are a partner or a reseller, and we have an account rep or some sort of extended relationship, or business development relationship with a provider. Among all of our providers, I can confidently and unconditionally say that Field Effect is the best, so based on that, I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

I was a part of our internal pilot, and I remember us taking a while to get the network appliance deployed. That was not because of Field Effect. When we first partnered with Field Effect, we were unfortunately still in the depths of the pandemic. This would have been 2022. We were just coming out of things. We wanted to do a pilot to evaluate it. We were doing our due diligence, but at the time, common shipping carriers were experiencing massive delays. There were transport delays and supply chain issues. Everything was up and down, so it took a while for us to get our appliance. That also caused a delay or lag in implementing the pilot. It was not due to any fault of Field Effect, but it took us a while to get Field Effect to the point where we could even begin to evaluate it. We finally got it installed and got a feel for it. 

Field Effect MDR has multiple layers. We had just come from another tier-one Magic Quadrant solution. It was also an MDR solution, but it only allowed us to have host-based agents installed. The only thing that was on the network was an appliance to collect agent telemetry that could then feed it to a SIEM. Prior to Field Effect MDR, we had to do a bunch of things with Linux boxes and so forth. It was a one-off per client to do things like SIEM integration, whereas Field Effect, out of the box, gives us multiple layers of telemetry, host, network, DNS, cloud, and email as a trailing indicator. That immediately allowed us to have much greater visibility. We had 360-degree visibility of a protected environment. That was something we had not expected or anticipated. We probably heard it during the early demonstrations and overviews from Field Effect, but we did not fully comprehend it. When we got our hands on the platform, it was pretty evident, very early on, that the platform was superior. It took us a bit longer to then do some field testing to make sure that the technology was working as well as we thought based on what it was reporting and doing. 

We then started doing some pilot tests. We did pilot tests at two clients initially and then at around five clients before we fully committed to the platform. There were upwards of 500 to 750 managed endpoints in this due diligence plus pilot phase. That was when we got to evaluate the SOC because we started getting a significant volume of alerts and AROs. We were then confidently able to say that the platform is awesome. It has multiple layers. It is distributed. It is 360 degrees. It is holistic. Their SOC is effective. They are quick. They are responsive. They are capable and competent, and they are tailored. Each client can have a different service profile, so we can adjust how aggressive or passive we want to be in a given environment based on client requirements and our requirements. That took a while to discover but not due to any failings of Field Effect. It takes a while to go through all of that due diligence and all of that hands-on testing.

Within the first quarter, we were convinced of the capability of the platform. So, after an initial sales cycle or a partnership cycle of maybe two to three months, and then another month and a half of just COVID-related shipping supply chain delays, we could get everything we needed to set up our initial due diligence environment.

A top-tier competitor to Field Effect in Magic Quadrant that we had been using until our switch to Field Effect was a great product, but each capability had an additional charge. We had to license modules separately, and each of those add-ons had to be added onto its own consumption and agreement. It was a nightmare from a billing perspective because we had multiple agreements, and each one had a jagged anniversary or a renewal anniversary. It was a nightmare, whereas Field Effect MDR is one product.

To a colleague who is interested in a cybersecurity solution but says they have never heard of the vendor Field Effect, I would ask if they have heard of CrowdStrike. Have they heard what CrowdStrike did just a couple of weeks ago? Name recognition is not necessarily the be-all and end-all. I am a motorcyclist. I am a car nut. I watch F1 which is a walking billboard of security providers. You have Darktrace. You have CrowdStrike. You have even Bitdefender out there. You have Webroot out there. You have all these folks out there. Some of these are very recognized brands or names. Are they effective forever? No.

We have had very well-recognized platforms that were horrible to operate. They were either ineffective at doing the job they were supposed to do, or they were not highly interoperable, causing lots of problems with particular operating systems. I remember an issue with the Mac platform with a very low-cost and ineffective platform. That caused us to abandon it and use a different platform for Macs because it was highly problematic. Name recognition is great, and one day, Field Effect might be up there as one of those top-tier brands where upon seeing the Field Effect logo, people would say that they are in security, they are top-tier, and they are in Magic Quadrants. It is just a matter of time. 

I would encourage people to do their due diligence and get referrals from Field Effect about partners like me or end customers. Run a pilot. Run a proof of concept. Get the product. Run it for yourself. Try it in the field. Field Effect has been pretty generous at least to the partner community. I do not know what would happen with direct customers for this, but with their channel partners, they are very willing to allow a bit of latitude in making sure that Field Effect is the best fit for an organization. So, name recognition is great, and it helps to shorten that initial introductory meeting because you already know a lot about the company. That is fantastic, but that is merely the start of the relationship. It is not the end. It would be nice if Field Effect had better name recognition, but let us look at the merits of the platform, the capabilities, the success, and the effectiveness of the platform and base our decisions on that.

It is a highly effective platform, but they have room for improvement. I would rate Field Effect MDR a nine out of ten because they have room to grow, but where they are right now is amazing. It is so much ahead of what a lot of other Magic Quadrant providers are offering, particularly in terms of the price point, the simplicity of consumption and billing, the robustness of the partnership, the effectiveness of the partnership, and the scalability that it allows our internal team to have.

It is a part of our security stack to help identify any vulnerabilities for our clients.

It is very important that Field Effect MDR is backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks and risks. The main reason we went with Field Effect was the experience that the CEO brings and the experience we had with the team. Their process for educating us was another reason.

I do not have direct access to its user interface, but I have heard from the team that it is very easy for them to access and see alerts come in. They found it very easy.

We could see its benefits pretty much right away. We started getting the alerts as soon as we started using it. We started to receive alerts on areas that we needed to address right away.

It definitely adds a specific layer of protection. I would not want to be without it, but it is not the only piece that we would use to proactively protect all our threat surfaces. It creates a very good layer, and for myself, the team has been a good access point to be able to get information and share that with clients too. That has been a big help for me. Compared to other software that we use, whenever we need assistance, they are the easiest ones to work with. We can get immediate assistance through chat.

Field Effect MDR helps our security team save time. We do not have to monitor a lot of things and go digging behind the scenes. They are doing that monitoring for us. It has almost added an employee who would have been doing that work for us. It has probably cut down on a third of our workload.

It informs us of the threats that matter and how to address them. We get alerts on even small issues that we do not need to address immediately. It helps to keep such things in the front of mind so that we can plan and schedule. It feels like it has made our operations run smoother because it is alerting us. Instead of just leaving it, we can schedule an update right away. We are addressing things right away. If an immediate problem comes up, we can deal with it as soon as possible because we have already scheduled something smaller, like an update.

Field Effect MDR gives us recommendations on how to reduce our risk. If there is something like a shared folder and they are seeing multiple accesses or credentials, they send us recommendations. We can let the client know as well about those recommendations. These recommendations are very important because our staff does not have to spend time thinking of a solution. The solution is already presented to us. We may add to the solution, but we do not have to spend time looking for a solution.

The alerts that we get are valuable. It notifies us if there is any attempted access and if there are any areas where we need to create more security for clients. It is stopping anything from happening before there is even an issue.

It does not replace everything we need. If they can include an email filter system, that would be great.

We have been using Field Effect MDR since January. We signed up in January. It has been about seven months now.

I have not had any issues with stability. We found the system very quick to reload and send us updates. We found it very quick.

It has been good. We are a growing company. As we are growing, we found it easy to grow with us.

When we see an alert come in and we are trying to find a solution for the client, we sometimes ask for help from the Field Effect team. If we already have the solution, but we are running into any technical difficulty deploying it on the client side, typically, they walk us through that.

I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

This is the first time we are using a product like this. 

Field Effect MDR did not replace any cybersecurity solutions. It added to our cybersecurity solutions. It was something we had to put in place, and we feel that we went with the right company.

It is deployed on the cloud. Its deployment was easy. It was done within the first day. It was very quick.

You can use a team, but we had one person on our team deploying it.

We worked with one consultant through the day as we were deploying it, and he was pretty much available to us although we only needed him for an hour. It was very easy to deploy the rest.

We have not found any maintenance after deploying it.

It is on the high end, but it is worth it for the service that you get from them.

ThreatLocker was a solution we looked at. The reason we did not go with them was that first of all, we did not find their onboarding process as thorough as with Field Effect. The price was a bit of a factor as well. I feel that Field Effect negotiated better with us.

The team is awesome. From a personal perspective, I have done a lot of webinars and different events with the team itself. They have been great at communicating about the product. I would suggest going and signing up for a webinar because they really explain the product well through that. The team will reach out to you after the webinar and follow up and get to know you as well.

To those considering Field Effect MDR, I would advise making sure that your client knows that you are very likely going to uncover some things that you may need to remediate right away. You just need to prepare them. Typically, they are not monetary changes. There may be some policy changes that you have to make within the company. Have that conversation with them so that they are prepared and flexible with those changes when they come.

I would rate Field Effect MDR a ten out of ten.

We are an IT Company that manages many other companies in different industries, like Healthcare, banks, federal, provincial, and private companies. It's highly important to keep them secure and that starts with us not getting hacked. After a lot of internal brainstorming and research, we chose Field Effect MDR. We have systems across different platforms like M365, Zendesk, and Accelo and we need to ensure these systems are totally secure and only accessed by our own team. Before we had this, we didn't have 24/7 monitoring.

Prior to having Field Effect MDR in our organization, our security stack was basically a policy. We had instructions such as "Don't click the link, don't bring your device outside your sight, don't put your login info here or there," etc. It always relied on our team to follow through and make sure they were doing the best they could. 

With this tool, we can entrust access to platforms to be managed by an AI algorithm that learns how we work and use our resources. 

Furthermore, while we will still be careful, instead of relying on a written policy and our team, we have a 24/7 AI + SOC Team behind us to ensure that we're staying secure. 

The feature I've found the move valuable is the 24/7 monitoring. We are a small organization that supports a LOT of endpoints and clients. Without this tool, it would be impossible for us to confidently tell clients that we are secure. 

Alongside this, the ability for Field Effect to make decisions on its own based on what it has learned from all the "training data" that we have provided in the past. It will only get better over time. We have had some false positives; for example, using a legitimate networking scanning tool from the terminal has been blocked. However, we were actually impressed when something so simple was caught!

Before Field Effect all we had was policies and all we could do was rely on our team members to make the right decisions and not compromise any systems or information. 

I'd suggest that Field Effect focus more on including things like phishing simulation and cybersecurity training. We always talk about a triangle of people, process and technology to solve any business problem. Field Effect has done wonders at covering the technology aspect of this triangle, however, to truly be a cybersecure organization, you need your people and processes to be just as secure.

I've used the solution for four months.

The solution is very stable; it does what it is meant for

The solution is really easy to install and you can use it in an organization of as little as five to as much as 1000 employees.

Support is very reliable. They answer us very quickly over email.

Positive

We used services like antivirus, EDRs and software like Office Protect, yet had no other MDR in the past.

The initial setup was very straightforward. It was connected with M365 and it was set up very easily .

We set up the solution with the vendor team and they had good knowledge and provided us with the best possible solution.

The ROI is at least ten times of its monetary value and unlimited in reputation protection.

It's worth the price. If you are paying $2000 a year to have this setup, it can save millions of dollars along with your company's reputation.

we also considered Huntress. We find Field Effect is way better.

Once you start using it you wouldn't look for another MDR.

We are an IT-managed service provider, offering comprehensive IT solutions to our customers, including robust cybersecurity protection. One key element of our Security-as-a-Service stack is Field Effect Covalence, which provides continuous 24/7 vulnerability scanning.

We understand that our clients expect us to protect them from external threats. However, this presented two challenges. Firstly, this level of security wasn't included in their standard service desk or network monitoring contracts. As a result, providing this unbilled service significantly increased our risk exposure. Therefore, we sought a solution that could both effectively safeguard our clients and mitigate risk for our own business, without compromising service quality. Field Effect Covalence is perfectly aligned with our needs in this regard.

Typically, we deploy an appliance at our clients' main locations where significant foot traffic is present, ten individuals or more. This local appliance monitors all firewall traffic and synchronizes with the cloud-based Covalence platform. Additionally, every endpoint device has a Covalence agent installed that regularly checks in, enabling us to perform web DNS filtering. This prevents endpoints from accessing unauthorized or potentially harmful categories. We also monitor clients' 365 or Google Workspace accounts for potential malware threats, including SharePoint environments. This comprehensive approach, implemented at both physical locations and remotely through the cloud, ensures effective threat scanning and detection.

The expertise behind Field Effect Covalence is crucial. Its team constantly monitors for cyberattacks and risks, offering an immense advantage in today's landscape saturated with new, competitive cybersecurity companies. Our core partners at Field Effect, with their backgrounds in cybersecurity and collaboration with Canadian intelligence services, provide invaluable insights and protection for our Canadian business clients. As former security professionals, their capabilities and dedication inspire complete trust.

Managing cybersecurity vulnerabilities has become effortless with Covalence. Unlike traditional solutions, which simply dump a mountain of alerts and potential threats on us, Covalence takes the burden off our shoulders with its managed detection and response service. Their advanced filtering removes the noise and prioritizes genuine threats, saving us valuable time and effort. This streamlined approach lets us focus solely on addressing critical issues and ensuring the safety of our customers.

Every day, we rely on the tagging system. Recently, we had a client who traveled from Africa to Europe and then back to Canada. The system immediately flagged this activity, alerting us to the logins from different locations. Having this awareness is crucial, especially compared to the risk of compromised credentials in vulnerable countries to threats originating from elsewhere in the world. The tagging system consistently proves its value, and we proactively patch vulnerable third-party applications thanks to its insights.

Covalence represents a significant advancement towards a unified cybersecurity solution that actively safeguards all our threat services. It continuously provides round-the-clock vulnerability assessment and scanning. However, it's crucial to complement this service with additional measures like password managers, end-user cybersecurity training, and multi-factor authentication. Therefore, I'd say Covalence covers roughly 80 percent of what we need to keep our customers secure, making it an ideal complement to other aspects of our Security-as-a-Service offerings.

Implementing Covalence has significantly improved our security team's efficiency. The proactive approach it fosters allows us to identify and counter potential threats before they materialize, unlike the reactive post-incident response we used to employ. The immediate notification of malware or lateral movement has been invaluable, with Covalence successfully intercepting such attempts on several occasions. Consequently, since deploying Covalence for our customers, we haven't experienced a single major cybersecurity incident. While it's true that our service desk team now dedicates more time to proactive maintenance, this translates to long-term time savings. Without Covalence, a significantly higher number of incidents would be inevitable, potentially damaging our reputation and causing days, if not weeks, of disruption while we handle incidents and mitigate threats. In summary, Covalence has saved us resources, personnel, and, most importantly, reputational damage from cyberattacks.

Covalence keeps us informed about cybersecurity threats and how to address them. When an alert is triggered, it automatically integrates with our existing ticket system and generates a checklist of mitigation steps and recommendations. We simply follow these instructions to handle the threat. However, if we need further information or assistance at any point during the mitigation process, Covalence's team is readily available. They provide immediate phone support and actively help us overcome any challenges we encounter.

Every month, we receive a set of personalized recommendations for each client and their devices. These recommendations cover everything from updating Windows core operating system patches to addressing vulnerabilities in specific third-party applications. By working through these notifications, we keep our clients safe. With 1,800 endpoints and a wide range of applications, such personalized recommendations are critical. Manually tracking vulnerabilities across every piece of software would be impossible. Therefore, having a system like this in place is crucial for saving time and reducing risk.

Covalence has been instrumental in transforming our security posture. It propelled us from a conventional network monitoring help desk to a leading, security-first managed service provider in Ottawa. This shift puts us head and shoulders above our competitors and has truly revolutionized our business. With Covalence in our arsenal, we've been able to renew and expand existing three-year contracts with all our clients and win significant new business by offering this cutting-edge security solution.

The most valuable features are Actions, Recommendations and Observations, which keep us informed about existing vulnerabilities so we can proactively update our endpoints and those of our customers against potential threats. Suspicious Email Analysis Service is another standout feature, allowing customers to report suspicious emails and receive professional analysis from our security team, ensuring they don't click on harmful links.

It would be incredibly valuable to have the Field Effect team handle some of the third-party application patching they're currently identifying. While it's fantastic that they're proactive in this area, the time commitment is significant. Integrating patching into their existing service offering would be a game-changer.

I'd love to see a tool that aids sales discovery efforts when we engage new clients. Ideally, this internal tool would scan their network environment to identify potential risks and give us a comprehensive picture of their network infrastructure. This would be a huge asset in informing our sales strategies and showcasing our expertise.

I have been using Field Effect Covalence for two years.

We haven't observed any stability issues with Covalence integration. Among our clients are many who run critical business applications, such as healthcare and legal software, placing significant demands on their networks. Initially, with such demanding environments, we had concerns about introducing a vulnerability scanning solution like Covalence, potentially impacting network performance. However, we've found that Covalence has zero impact on performance. Our clients haven't experienced any performance degradation on their networks with Covalence in place.

Covalence is highly scalable, accommodating a wide range of client needs. They offer different appliance sizes based on the number of endpoints a client manages. Most clients find themselves within the first two tiers: one to 25 endpoints and 25 to 100 endpoints. However, an enterprise tier exists for larger clients. Scaling up is seamless. Clients simply inform their account manager when their needs increase and the appliance can be easily upgraded to handle a higher number of endpoints and traffic. For example, one client recently opened a new store and promptly acquired an additional appliance for the new location. Maintenance is minimal. The software agent automatically pushes and upgrades all endpoints whenever a new version is released, requiring little intervention from clients.

We've collaborated with Field Effect's technical team on numerous occasions, primarily in troubleshooting situations. They routinely notify us of offline appliances or configuration inconsistencies, and we work together to resolve these issues promptly. In instances of malware detection, we may solicit their expert advice on mitigation strategies. Their support team consistently exceeds expectations. Their responsiveness is immediate, consistently connecting us with the right personnel to address our concerns. In short, their service is exemplary.

Positive

We previously depended on basic firewalls and antivirus software, without utilizing cloud-based solutions or MDR.

I spearheaded the selection, implementation, and deployment of the solution. The initial rollout was smooth. We deployed it to our PSA system, ConnectWise, which functioned well for a year. Then, we migrated to Kaseya's Autotask, and the integration went very smoothly. It was fantastic to automate pushing Covalence agents using our RMM solution. Every morning, it checks clients for endpoints without the surveillance agent and targets them for automatic deployment. Essentially, any device in the environment without the agent will be equipped.

Deploying Covalence fully is remarkably quick. After internal environment testing, the entire process – including physical appliance installation, agent push, and integration setup – typically takes only an afternoon or just a few hours. It's surprisingly straightforward. We regularly onboard new clients by deploying Covalence in this way, and it consistently takes around two hours. The simplicity is truly remarkable.

I am responsible for ordering the hardware and ensuring its sign-off with Field Effect. One person then takes the hardware on-site for the onboarding process.

Our team handled the entire implementation process. We collaborated with the Field Effect team to ensure a smooth onboarding experience for the customer. They shipped the necessary appliance and box to us. We configured the cloud portal to seamlessly integrate with the client's existing environment, whether it's Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace. WebDNS filtering was also set up. Finally, we deployed the appliance at the customer's site without any network downtime. This involved port mirroring on the core switch for monitoring inbound and outbound firewall traffic. We coordinated with the Field Effect team to verify device visibility before commencing ARO notification reception.

Implementing the security tool has delivered a clear return on investment. Since its introduction, we haven't experienced any major cybersecurity incidents, allowing us to confidently extend nearly all existing customer contracts into new three-year agreements. This not only minimizes risk for both us and our clients but also secures business continuity for the next three years.

Furthermore, new business has surged by at least 35 percent. This growth is directly linked to businesses' heightened concern about security, a domain they often find confusing and daunting. By offering a comprehensive security stack, we've positioned ourselves as a trusted IT provider capable of effectively addressing these concerns. This has resulted in a win-win scenario for both our existing and new clients.

The pricing model is attractive. We're currently enrolled in the volume package, which offers tiered pricing based on usage. As our business grows and we acquire new clients, our account manager proactively informs us when we're nearing the next tier threshold. They suggest that formalizing the increase in service usage could be beneficial, as it would unlock a lower monthly price point. I genuinely appreciate their attentiveness to our usage and their guidance in maximizing our success. This win-win structure incentivizes us to grow, while simultaneously reducing our per-unit cost. Overall, the pricing feels very reasonable for the value we receive.

Before Covalence, we lacked any cybersecurity solutions. I evaluated major players like CrowdStrike, Blackpoint, and SentinelOne, but Covalence stood out. Since they're also located in Ottawa, we quickly fostered a close partnership. Beyond the technology itself, the care and attention we receive from Covalence's support team and partner account managers is remarkable. They actively involve us in product improvement initiatives and are always there for us when needed. The partnership feels genuinely reciprocal, which is rare in this industry.

What I appreciate most about Field Effect is the personal touch they offer. Compared to larger cybersecurity companies that just dump threats on us and say "Deal with it," Field Effect is actively there to help. They filter out the noise, so we only see the real threats, and they're always reachable when we need them. This creates a personal relationship. We know the people behind the service, not just our account manager. It's a true partnership, not just a client-vendor dynamic, and that's crucial for me.

I would rate Field Effect Covalence a ten out of ten.

Field Effect Covalence is a hidden gem in the managed service provider industry. We partnered with them early on, and it's fantastic to witness their growth, participation in trade shows, and proactive initiatives like this one to raise awareness. Having experienced its effectiveness firsthand, I wholeheartedly recommend Field Effect Covalence as the best-kept secret solution we've encountered. Any MSP would be well-served by considering them.

Organizations must avoid the need for additional resources simply to handle endless false positives and threat alerts. Managed detection and response services are designed to save time and resources with a proactive defense. Choosing a solution like Field Effect and Covalence allows us to maintain our current staffing levels while gaining awareness of vulnerabilities. This means we don't need to build a dedicated security team or hire a Chief Security Officer. Covalence takes care of it all, making it a perfect fit for an MSP. Ultimately, we want a company that's there to support us whenever we need them.

We use Field Effect Covalence at three automotive car dealerships to monitor all of our endpoints and make sure that they comply with updates and security and to notify us of any threats or vulnerabilities that they may have.

Covalence being backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks and risks is important to us.

Managing Covalence is easy.

The actions, recommendations, and observations work well and are timely. The only frustration we've had is when there is certain software that's out of date and it keeps finding traces of the software that did not get updated or uninstalled. Overall, they work very well.

Covalence's benefits were clear from the start. It revealed the significant outdatedness and deficiencies in our existing systems, and within just a few months, it identified a security vulnerability we would have completely missed otherwise.

Covalence informs us of threats with minimal false positives.

Covalence helps us mitigate security risks by recommending actions like keeping software current, removing unnecessary or unknown programs, and eliminating applications that could potentially compromise our organization.

The most valuable features are AROs, which provide timely notifications for out-of-compliance or out-of-specification detections. Additionally, the recently introduced endpoint view, which displays the health status of our network endpoints, has become an essential daily tool.

While Covalence addresses our notification and visibility needs, it falls short in keeping information up-to-date, which is where our MSP comes in to supplement its functionality.

I'd love to see a feature in Covalence that allows manually removing endpoints from the view and receiving notifications if they come back online. Currently, I use the Endpoint View daily, but some systems stay online for up to 30 days even when no longer in service. The ability to manually remove these would be very helpful. Additionally, since Covalence is a key tool for software updates and patch management notifications, it would be fantastic if it could automate some of this process or provide links to the latest software versions. While Covalence highlights the need for updates and what needs to be done, it doesn't necessarily point users to where they can find the software itself.

I have been using Field Effect Covalence for four years.

Field Effect Covalence has shown minimal stability issues, with only one incident attributable to a five-year-old hardware appliance.

Field Effect Covalence is highly scalable. It happens naturally as we add and remove devices.

The technical support team is professional, helpful, and responsive. I can't recall ever encountering an issue that they couldn't resolve.

Positive

The initial deployment of Covalence proved challenging due to my lack of experience, but subsequent deployments were much smoother as I gained familiarity with the process.

Our last two deployments took a couple of hours to complete.

I typically deploy the hardware and maybe help with the group policy. But then, for the most part, our managed service provider IT company, sets up the group policy, and it pushes it out that way the first time, and then it's just an ongoing automated process after that.

While I have not seen a quantifiable return on investment from Covalence, a major cybersecurity incident could have been incredibly expensive, highlighting its potential importance.

Field Effect Covalence's pricing is just right.

I would rate Field Effect Covalence nine out of ten.

The only maintenance Covalence requires is updating the endpoint agent twice a year, at most. These updates are released by Field Effect and necessitate modifying the group policy to reflect the new version. This is because the old group policy won't work with the updated agent.

Completely unfamiliar with Field Effect before consulting for an end user, I've come to appreciate it immensely. Now, it brings me real peace of mind.

My advice to almost everyone I've talked to about Covalence is that in the first few months, there's gonna be a lot of leg work, bringing your systems up to date and in compliance with what the AROs are recommending. But once you have them up to date and know what to look for, it's pretty easy maintenance going forward of your network.

We wanted a technology partner to provide complete cybersecurity protection to our entire organization.   

In the past, we had multiple solutions from different vendors and they were difficult to manage. I wanted one vendor to protect us from top to bottom and provide a single "pane of glass" for our technical team to manage.  

 I was also looking for a vendor with a stable team of cyber specialists who were easily and quickly accessible to us for consultation on any issues or questions.  Additionally, we wanted to be billed in Canadian dollars.  

The IT team is having to spend far less time investigating cybersecurity incidents and cybersecurity "noise" and more time on tasks that drive the business forward.  

We have one cybersecurity partner who has a 360-view of all activity on our network and is able to paint a picture of behaviour and respond to suspicious activity more intelligently. The result is fewer false alarms and less time wasted by our technical team on noise and fruitless investigations. The Field Effect team of experts is an extension of our IT team.

Direct and easy and quick communication to the Field Effect cybersecurity team experts has led to quick resolution of any problems or alerts. The ARO system provides easy explanations of issues detected and simple instructions for resolution. If an issue is expected we can respond accordingly and suppress future alerts pertaining to the same issue. If we believe we have resolved an issue, the Field Effect team will verify our solution and report on the issue again if our solution does not address the problem.  

The solution could improved DNS filtering and fuller integration into ConnectWise PSA (I understand both are in the works). The current roaming DNS filter doesn't seem to be too complete and we're hoping to be able to eliminate purchases on other filters, such as Umbrella.  

The ConnectWise PSA integration is two-way but does not send our comments back to the Field Effect portal. Additionally, they have recently come out with an option that does not require a physical appliance onsite.  This will be valuable for smaller locations.

I've used the solution for over two years - since Nov 2022 approximately.

The solution has been extremely stable and predictable.

It's very scalable from the very smallest organizations to the largest.  

Customer service and support are very responsive - particularly with possible cyber incidents. We hear from them nearly immediately on urgent issues and within a day on other questions.

Positive

We had used Arctic Wolf and a bundle from ConnectWise. The Arctic Wolf product, although very complete, was significantly more expensive. The ConnectWise solution included SentinelOne but was more challenging to use as it did not have one place to look for security issues.

Initial set up was very simple and detailed instructions were provided by FE for the appliance and network adjustments. FE engineers provided white glove support.

It was done in-house as the setup was very simple.

We didn't do a formal ROI.

In our evaluation, two years ago, we found the Field Effect Covalence product and service to be the simplest to set up and pricing was lower than the other competitors.   

We have tested and implemented a few other solutions.   

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 dedicated to keeping our clients' fleets compliant and secure. Our proactive approach allows us to receive timely notifications when attention is needed, enabling us to act swiftly.

Our system highlights specific devices, files, or software that require attention and provides a CVE number detailing potential vulnerabilities and remediation steps. If you ever find yourself unsure about how to address an issue, their knowledgeable team is just a text message away. With real people ready to assist, they go above and beyond traditional security software to ensure your peace of mind.

Thanks to the MDR, it is easy for us to effectively develop policies to address vulnerabilities. By integrating Mobile Device Management (MDM) with our MDR, we can swiftly tackle detected issues. This combination enhances our cybersecurity posture and provides peace of mind, significantly reducing downtime. 

By proactively staying ahead of potential threats, we ensure our systems remain secure and efficient. This strategic approach not only safeguards our operations but also reinforces our commitment to maintaining a robust security environment.

The automated response feature is incredibly effective. For instance, we can automatically lock a Microsoft 365 account if a login attempt occurs from an unauthorized country. This proactive measure significantly enhances our security posture by swiftly mitigating potential risks. 

The system's ability to respond instantly to suspicious activities not only protects sensitive information but also provides peace of mind, knowing that our accounts are safeguarded against unauthorized access. Overall, this functionality is a valuable asset for maintaining robust security.

We've noticed that some alerts are indicating vulnerabilities that have already been resolved. While it's essential to stay informed about potential issues, the recurring notifications about past vulnerabilities can lead to confusion and may detract from our focus on current threats. 

Streamlining the alert system to filter out these resolved issues would enhance our efficiency and ensure that we concentrate on the most relevant and pressing security matters. Overall, refining this aspect would significantly improve our experience.

I've used the solution for two months now.

So far, we haven't had any issues; it's always been stable.

The solution is pretty scalable. You can go from a small company to a big company, from a local software agent to a network monitor.

Whenever we reached out for assistance or to whitelist a reported vulnerability that we knew was not harmful to our environment, we found the team exceptionally easy to work with.

Positive

We are in the process of integrating existing solutions with this new product. Rather than merely replacing what we have, this addition provides an opportunity to enhance our current capabilities.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Someone else acquired this solution for the company I'm working with.

As a technician, this question falls outside my role. That said, I recognize the significant benefits of a tool that accomplishes tasks in a fraction of the time compared to manual security methods.

The price is in accordance with the provided services.

We did not evaluate a different solution. 

You should certainly consider trying Field Effect; it is a robust solution that will soon be essential for any organization prioritizing security.