Field Effect MDR Reviews

It's our cybersecurity solution for cloud, network, and endpoints. We do a weekly review of the endpoints, and because software is always changing and no software is secure, we are updating software all the time. We rely on them for our cybersecurity solution.

Covalence informs you of the threats and how to address them. They send emails and texts. They tell you what the level is. You can see the recommendations and ask for help. You can escalate. It's very helpful.

For a small business that doesn't have a full IT or cybersecurity department, their guys are there when you need them. If something comes up and gets identified by the system, you can reach out to a human if you need help doing the analysis. A couple of times, I ran software that did the analysis, and then I sent it back to them. They were able to review what the malware was and evaluate whether it was safe or not to proceed after it was clean.

For endpoint management, Covalence identifies operating systems that need updating to help us stay on top of everything. It's running in the background and does a packet-level analysis of everything that comes in. It also has an auto-response feature, so if something gets through and is clicked on, or somehow gets through the network, it gets isolated and quarantined, and we get notified. We've had one instance of that scenario where someone got an Excel spreadsheet that was malicious, and we were notified and it was quarantined. We worked with the forensic team at Covalence and ran a full review of that computer.

The packet-level analysis—knowing that everything that comes in is getting looked at—and the endpoint protection are the most valuable features. Whatever comes in, it can be as if your door is always open. If you're on the internet, things can creep in that you don't want. But Covalence is looking at everything that comes through.

And the auto-response is valuable, knowing that it's going to quarantine any malicious thing that happens to get through or when a user happens to click on something they shouldn't have clicked on. Email is the major vector of cyber attacks, and we do have training for that. But in the event that someone clicks on something they shouldn't, the system will isolate it and quarantine it. And their team does a post-event analysis.

They have experts available to do a forensic-level evaluation of what the issue is. Luckily, we haven't had any serious attacks. I don't know if that can be attributed 100 percent to Covalence, but we have peace of mind knowing it's there.

We use the tagging of alerts, recommendations, and observances, as well as the SEAS (suspicious email alert system). The tagging is a different way of categorizing threats. Endpoint management gives me the person that I need to deal with for a specific vulnerability. But the tagging identifies vulnerabilities at a vulnerability level. An example might be "out-of-date software soon," and then it would list out the 12 employees who are running that on their endpoints. If you approach it by endpoint, it's the opposite. It will say, "Here's the endpoint and all the vulnerabilities." The tagging helps me prioritize. Often, it's just an observance, such as someone using Tor browser for something. It comes in as text and email, and you can take care of it.

The area where they can make it better is by giving responses to the end-user. For example, when there is an alert to the administrator, I get it. I have to copy and paste everything to everyone, telling them, "Hey, your Zoom is out of date," or "Mac user, you have to update your iOS because there's a vulnerability." And then I have to follow up with them, and it's a real pain.

Also, with the email alert system, when people have suspicious emails they forward them. The analysis comes back, and I have access to it. But what I want is that if someone who is not the administrator sends in a suspicious email, they should get the email back with the response from Covalence. Now, it keeps that information in the administrator portal. But I want to get out of the way. If someone reports something, the answer should go back to that person, not to me. In some cases, it requires an admin to execute software updates, but I would like them to know exactly what they need to do to be up-to-date and have a vulnerability-free endpoint.

We have been using Field Effect Covalence for at least three years.

I don't think it's ever crashed. It's always running in the background. I get reports on how many scans and how many malicious things it has stopped. I have peace of mind knowing we have some protection running.

I would assume it's scalable, but it's not as if my company went from 40 to 5,000 employees. For us, the scalability is unknown.

The support is good because you never know when you're going to need help with something.

That time I mentioned, when someone in the warehouse got an email with a spreadsheet that came up as a high alert, we quarantined him, and then we did the analysis with their help. I called in and support said, "We're going to send you an executable to give us all the data from that computer so we can analyze it, see how they got in, and what toolkit they used for the Excel."

There was no repercussion, but it was great being able to call immediately and have a forensic-level guy on the line that could advise us.

And if I ever have questions, I can send an email, and they're really good about responding. That's when it's more of a casual question. But when something is pressing or urgent, that's when you call in.

They're good in both respects. They're very good. When I needed them, they were absolutely there.

Positive

We had something super-basic and rudimentary: a firewall and spam filter. That wasn't a model that was keeping up with cybersecurity threats. We went from having a super low-level, basic security setup to having an actual modern cybersecurity tool to help us identify and deal with threats.

Cybersecurity is a standard requirement now. It's not that you can just get away with a firewall and a spam filter. We knew a lot of companies that got hacked, and we wanted to be ahead of the curve. I brought it up and was doing some initial due diligence, and then our CFO said we needed a solution. I had told them before about Field Effect Covalence and that I reached out to all the majors, but the starting point for them was $24,000 a year.

The fact that Covalence is backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks is very important to us. One of the reasons I selected Covalence was because their founder was a big name in cybersecurity. He was Canada's number-one cybersecurity guy, and he worked with a task force that was like the MI5-equivalent of cybersecurity back in the day. That was good to know.

Also, with this product, you have access to all of these features, whereas with other systems, it seemed like if something happened, you would have to pay a consultant some crazy rate per hour to sort out your situation. Whenever something happens or I have a question about one of the endpoints, they have people to help out.

I have an account manager, which is very helpful, and we do quarterly reviews. It's a complete solution for us as a small to midsized company. There were a lot of solutions out there for enterprises, because that's where the money is, but cyberattackers don't care if you are a small or midsized company. If they can get money out of you, they're going to hit you. They shoot things out, and wherever they land is is where they go. So this was the right solution for us, and we've been really happy with it so far.

The initial deployment of Covalence was super easy. I'm an IT generalist with a certain focus on integration, e-commerce, and SQL. The diagram instructed you  to plug the blue cable in next to the blue dot. It was super dumbed-down, which was perfect for me.

As for maintenance, there was one time when they updated the endpoint agent, but it was super easy because everything is monitored. I had to update all the endpoints, and it was pretty easy, but I didn't have to update the hardware.

I did it all by myself, without any help from anyone. It was really simple.

When we were searching, it was when cybersecurity was a huge topic and there was an unclear market. It wasn't like if I needed a CRM, Salesforce was absolutely the number one, or if I needed an e-commerce system, Shopify was absolutely the number one.

And most of what was out there was built for enterprises, and they would parse out the different components. You might get one component for one thing, another component for another thing, and a third component for another aspect of cybersecurity. Each one would be about $24,000 a year. That just wasn't affordable for a small to medium business at all.

I got in touch with Arctic Wolf, but they were for the big spender, at $24,000. A lot of other companies were in the same ballpark. It was a barrier to entry, and we couldn't just shop around and try this one this year and another one next year.

When it comes to managing Covalence, it's easy in the sense that all the information is there, but it's not automatic. You can't just plug it in and go to the golf course or take a nap. Someone has to review it and follow up, especially on the endpoints. It's like the weather: things change every day. New emails come in, and that's probably the biggest attack vector. There are always new threat actors. It's not difficult, but you need to monitor it and respond to whatever shows up on your dashboard. You need to keep all your systems up-to-date, patched, and secure. It helps.

For example, Zoom updates their software just about every week. Everyone knows, "Okay, we have to update soon," because Covalence runs a comparison of identified vulnerabilities, and they always show up.

Covalence doesn't cover physical assets, but it covers all the digital resources: networks, endpoints, and the cloud. It is installed and monitoring all the traffic on all of those systems. It is the product that does everything.

If you haven't heard of Field Effect, you should consider it. What sold me is that it is a complete solution that is priced competitively. And I'm not saying that I bought it on price alone, but it ticked all the boxes that I was looking for: endpoint, network, cloud, and it wasn't $24,000 a year. For a small company, that's a sizable amount. There just wasn't an SMB product that could compete with Covalence when I was looking. Maybe there is one out there now, but I have sat in on so many presentations and I didn't see any for small and medium-sized businesses like Covalence. Maybe now that the enterprise market is saturated, Arctic Wolf is coming out with a less feature-rich product priced for small-to-medium-sized businesses. But it's hard to compete with Covalence in that market based on its feature set and cost.

The big takeaway is that we haven't been paralyzed by a cyberattack. I know it's stopping things. I don't know if there was some threat actor who tried to attack us and then said to themselves, "Oh, man, these guys have Covalence." For me, it's a case of job security that we haven't been attacked. If anything happens, they're going to look at me as the VP of IT and say, "It's your fault." But we haven't been attacked, and we see all the vulnerabilities. It's all laid out. It's monitoring every endpoint and every packet. For me, that's peace of mind.

We use Field Effect Covalence as our endpoint detection and response solution. We use the solution on our desktops to provide an additional layer of security.

We wanted to detect deviations from baseline behavior on our endpoints and provide an additional layer of security beyond our antivirus protection. We also wanted to enhance our security posture for Office 365 on-premises and in the cloud.

Covalence has different levels of behavior. At the lowest level, it alerts us to potential problems. At the next level, it makes recommendations and allows us to take immediate action. At the highest level, it takes automated actions and escalates issues to the Covalence team. We can reach out to the Covalence team for their input and experience on threats in our environment. It's like having an extension of our team that we can draw on for expertise.

Managing Covalence is extremely simple. We use the web portal to manage all aspects of the solution.

Covalence provides a single cybersecurity solution that proactively protects all our threat services as part of our layered security approach. Covalence provides a strong defense package which is part of that multilayered suite of protections.

Covalence saves our organization time by constantly monitoring for threats in the environment, deviations from baseline behaviors, and threats in the cloud against our Office 365 landscape. It generates action responses that are sent to the team. We no longer have to actively monitor for those threats. Covalence monitors them for us. We have replaced one full-time employee's time with Covalence.

Covalence not only identifies threats, but it offers remediation advice as well.

Focusing on the threats that are relevant to us and the threats that actually matter in our environment, allows us to target the resources that we have to address specific issues and threats.

Covalence in the context of the recommendations that it makes gives us additional information that we can use. They have made a positive impact on the security posture by allowing us to close additional gaps and strengthen our security posture.

The solution's advanced detection behaviors, automated notifications and responses, and automated remediation behaviors are valuable features.

The tagging of ARO closure has room for improvement. Covalence needs different categorizations for closing AROs.

I have been using Field Effect Covalence for nearly two years.

Field Effect Covalence is extremely stable.

Field Effect Covalence is scalable. We have had no issues scaling in our environment.

The technical support is excellent and extremely responsive.

Positive

The deployment was straightforward. Post evaluation, we rolled Covalence out on mass to all endpoints within our environment. One person was required for the deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house.

Covalence has provided a return on investment by actively intercepting two incidents that would have had a significant financial impact on our organization if allowed to play out.

Covalence is cost-effective.

We evaluated a range of different products and found that Covalence provided us with the best suite of tools, giving us the functionality and visibility we were looking for.

I would rate Field Effect Covalence nine out of ten.

Our environment is a Windows environment, and there are approximately 300 endpoints.

People should consider Field Effect Covalence, which is a robust, scalable, and dependable solution that is certainly worth reviewing. Talk to some users who are currently using Covalence to get their feedback.

Covalence is an enterprise-level solution that is both functionally rich and cost-effective.

While we focus on being a general managed service provider rather than a specialized security solutions provider, we take security seriously. Therefore, we leverage Field Effect Covalence to comprehensively manage and monitor our client sites from a security standpoint.

Our organization currently lacks dedicated expert resources to analyze the data from the equipment. While having the equipment and ingesting information is important, it's crucial to have qualified personnel properly review the data to avoid a high rate of false negatives. Without this, the output could be unreliable and generate excessive irrelevant tickets, creating a noisy and inefficient solution. This is where Covalence shines, as their team of experts constantly monitors the data and provides valuable insights, which is immensely beneficial.

Field Effect Covalence is one of the easiest security solutions to manage. It integrates seamlessly with our existing PSA, meaning it interacts directly with our ticketing system. This eliminates the need for duplicate data entry and simplifies the workflow. Covalence identifies the actual issues, suggests appropriate resolutions, and provides supporting documentation to explain why addressing the issue is important and relevant.

When information enters our ticketing system, we categorize it based on its urgency and the action required. If it demands immediate attention, it's labeled as an "action" with high severity. Medium-severity actions require review and potential resolution within the same day. Observations, on the other hand, signal potential issues that need monitoring and assessment to determine if intervention is necessary. Recommendations, like software patches, are suggested solutions for identified problems. However, these may not always be feasible due to non-compliant or legacy applications that lack updates. In such cases, a discussion with the client is crucial to determine the best course of action. Covalence tagging simplifies this process by clearly categorizing information into three types: Actions, Recommendations, and Observations. Each ARO is further classified by severity (high, medium, and low), making it clear what needs to be done upon entry into the ticketing system.

We've experienced two key benefits from implementing Field Effect Covalence. The first, from a business owner's perspective, is risk mitigation. As someone constantly focused on minimizing vulnerability, knowing Covalence regularly reviews client sites and generates actionable reports provides immense peace of mind. It highlights areas needing improvement—something our internal team might miss. Their deeper analysis ensures no security issues fall through the cracks, fulfilling our initial purpose for bringing them on board. Second, from a client perspective, Covalence's reporting tool allows us to present monthly reports demonstrating our compliance and commitment to their security. In cases where clients hesitate to address recurring findings, the reports document their reluctance, holding them accountable. Overall, Covalence simplifies risk mitigation for both ourselves and our clients. Their independent reports offer transparency, showcasing not just outstanding issues but also their resolution speed.

While we use Covalence for monitoring and recognizing the broadness of cybersecurity, believing a single tool can't cover everything, I think cybersecurity ultimately revolves around access and firewall management. However, various aspects arise, and for actual monitoring and oversight of client activity within their site, Covalence provides comprehensive coverage.

Covalence streamlines the work of security teams by significantly reducing the need for manual research. Each ticket generated by Covalence provides clear, step-by-step instructions for resolving any identified ARO. It pinpoints non-compliant devices or applications and highlights any outstanding requirements for resolving the issue. Additionally, Covalence provides supporting documentation to explain the rationale behind each recommendation, promoting well-informed decision-making. This comprehensive approach empowers even Level 1 and Level 2 technicians to effectively address AROs and achieve timely resolutions.

Field Effect's agent includes an EDR and DNS solution, eliminating the need for separate cybersecurity tools for those functionalities.

Regarding Covalence's recommendations, some mandate specific actions to avoid vulnerabilities. Others suggest further analysis, like the example of multiple end-user VPN products. Having numerous VPNs accessing corporate data on corporate devices poses a significant challenge. However, with adequate documentation, we can effectively present this issue to clients. Ultimately, focusing on a single approved VPN and eliminating others seems like the prudent course of action to enhance security. Another example of this focus-narrowing concept applies to web browsers. The more applications and browsers running on a client's system, the higher the risk of non-compliance and the need for updates. Minimizing unnecessary tools simplifies maintenance and enhances overall security. Covalence's recommendations, along with the supporting reports, provide valuable insights for clients to improve their security posture. Discussing these findings in detail offers guidance and empowers clients to make informed decisions regarding their security infrastructure.

Individually, each aspect of Field Effect Covalence might not hold much significance. However, when combined, they create a powerful and effective system. I appreciate the "set it and forget it" nature of Field Effect Covalence. The platform keeps a watchful eye on client security, and I have confidence that any potential issues will be identified and addressed. The system generates Action Recommendation and Observation reports, which provide detailed instructions for resolving any security concerns and ensuring client compliance. This makes it remarkably easy for network management companies like ours to seamlessly handle the security needs of our clients. 

I'd like improved visibility into the backend data where logs are stored, along with integrations with a wider range of products. Field Effect Covalence already integrates with Office 365 and AWS, and has recently added Fortinet and Duo. Expanding their integrations to cover even more products would be highly beneficial.

I have been using Field Effect Covalence for six years.

Field Effect Covalence is stable. We have not encountered any issues and we don't see what is happening in the backend.

Field Effect Covalence is highly scalable. While the core agent software remains constant, the infrastructure adapts to growing data volumes. When an organization surpasses the capacity of its current appliance, simply replacing it with a more powerful one seamlessly extends the platform's capabilities. Additionally, adding appliances to accommodate new branch offices or increased data intake is straightforward. In essence, scaling Covalence is often as simple as adding or upgrading hardware, making it a flexible and adaptable solution for businesses of all sizes.

As early adopters of Field Effect Covalence, we've received exceptional technical support from their team. Their responsiveness is impressive, regardless of the ticket complexity or time of day. Even nights and weekends haven't posed a challenge – they're always available to assist. 

Positive

Previously, we used a hosted SIEM solution. However, this required dedicated security expertise for management, and it generated a significant amount of irrelevant alerts. Outsourcing SIEM monitoring has proven to be far simpler and more effective. Aside from the convenience, it's also slightly cheaper than maintaining and supporting an in-house team. Additionally, offloading liability is a major advantage. Field Effect Covalence takes ownership of SIEM monitoring and assumes responsibility for security vigilance, which we always emphasize to our clients. That's why we made the switch.

Deployment is fairly straightforward, but it needs the right hands on the job. In other words, this isn't a task for a level-one technician. While level-one and level-two staff can be helpful with routine operations, the initial setup requires a bit more expertise — someone with networking knowledge and experience. It doesn't need to be the most senior person, but just not someone starting.

The deployment process takes just one day. It involves four hours of setting up the on-premises components, followed by agent deployment and gradual activation. From this perspective, the actual onboarding is distinct from the deployment itself. The deployment itself is relatively straightforward and completed within a day. Onboarding, however, takes a little longer. This is due to the initial "noise" of the system, where security catches previously undetected issues. This thoroughness is a positive, as it ensures nothing slips through the cracks. Therefore, onboarding requires time for things to settle down and establish a regular rhythm of handling typical support tickets.

One person can complete the full deployment.

In-house. 

We've lost clients due to their growth or acquisition. Some who experience significant expansion build their own full-time IT departments, while others join companies with existing IT infrastructure. Notably, regardless of the reason for departure, they've all chosen to retain Field Effect Covalence.

While Field Effect Covalence's pricing seems competitive for the market, the biggest hurdle lies in the lack of dedicated security budgets within many organizations. Convincing these companies to allocate further IT expenditure specifically for security can be tough. They often struggle to justify adding another line item when they're already paying for individual security tools. This fragmented approach can leave them without a comprehensive monitoring system, which ultimately is the most critical need. So, the primary challenge isn't the price point, but rather helping companies understand the value proposition of a holistic security solution and how it complements their existing infrastructure. Once that hurdle is cleared, the current pricing of Field Effect Covalence appears reasonable.

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

Our client base varies in size, with a range of 15 to 150 users per client. The average client has 25 users.

We have some minor housekeeping tasks related to endpoint agents that don't deploy correctly, but we don't have any ongoing maintenance responsibilities.

Field Effect Covalence is a fantastic Canadian company, a testament to Canadian innovation and success. The talented team behind it began their journey in government cybersecurity. Recognizing a crucial need in the small and medium-sized business space, they leveraged their expertise to create a solution that has truly taken off. For five years now, we've been using Covalence with every client, and not a single one has experienced a breach. This is remarkable, considering that 60 percent of SMBs face a breach at some point. It speaks volumes about the effectiveness of Covalence and the expertise of its founders.

Field Effect Covalence is a reliable solution for our security monitoring needs. We haven't found anything else that compares. I appreciate the program's simple interface and the company's efficient service delivery. What truly impresses me is their client interaction. They don't just provide alerts; they explain the cause and implications, identify security gaps, showcase Field Effect's prompt resolutions, and highlight the exceptional speed of their response. This transparency and responsiveness are truly outstanding.

We have integrated it with our Microsoft 365 deployment. We also use it on our endpoints, and we use it on our office network and email cloud solution.

Covalence saves me time because I don't have to threat-hunt. It does some of the threat-hunting for me. It finds the security issues we have, so we don't have to proactively investigate. Most of the investigation is done for us.

The fact that Covalence informs us of threats and how to address them really helps in large terms because we don't have security officers. It means that my operations team is actually able to deal with security issues. For an organization that doesn't invest a lot in IT, it's a worthwhile investment. I would recommend it.

For example, one type of recommendation is based on vulnerabilities, and the recommendation shows you what the vulnerability is and how to remediate it. That helps to reduce risk.

I like the proactive notifications and the security awareness that it gives. We mostly use it passively. I also like the Office 365 protection. There are user notifications about our cloud solutions and access, meaning authentication and possible breaches. Overall, the notifications and alerts are valuable.

There are also new features like the DNS protection, which is quite good.

In addition, the Covalence experts, who are constantly monitoring for attacks, are very important. During the day, their responses are very good. They are very useful.

Regarding managing the solution, it's very easy to use. We receive notifications via email, and one of my engineers uses the portal to look at the lot of them. They're very easy to understand and to take action on as well.

The tagging feature shows in the reports. The tags tell us some basic security action points. For example, they show us what we have faced during the week or the month, depending on the report, and how we can make our environment better. It is useful to us.

Our company has been using Field Effect Covalence for three years.

I've never seen any stability issues in the two years that I've been here.

Ever since I deployed the solution, I've never had to scale.

They could improve their support. My organization is in the Pacific time zone, and they operate on Eastern time. They provide support from 8 AM to 5 PM, and emergency support from 8 AM to 8 PM their time. Because this is a security solution, I would recommend that they extend their support hours and, for emergencies, even to 24/7 or 24/5.

Other than that, their support is quite thorough. They provide very excellent support. I had one negative incident, but that was a misunderstanding, so I don't see it negatively. I had a conversation with the head of support, and we managed to resolve that very easily. Generally, their support is very good.

Positive

We have appliances on-premises, we have its clients installed on our PCs, and we have connectors to our cloud, so we use it in a hybrid fashion.

The deployment of Covalence is quite easy. I was involved in deploying the appliances, and it was quite easy.

I have never seen it require any maintenance other than the replacement of the devices at end-of-life.

We were able to do it ourselves with help from their support team, but that help was minimal. They have very good support articles as well to provide that information.

Because I was remote at that time, I needed somebody to be onsite to connect the device physically, but if I had been onsite I would have done it all myself.

If a colleague were interested in a solution like this but said to me they had never heard of Field Effect, I would say that two years ago, no one had ever heard of ChatGPT. But when they gave it a try, it was amazing. I have already recommended Field Effect to one client and I would recommend it again.

My advice would be to look at your use cases and discuss them with Field Effect to see which solutions are best for you. I only use a small part of the solution, but they have penetration testing and are able to do other things that I may not use. Discuss your requirements with them, and work with them to build the best solution for you. That's the best approach.

I'm a customer of Covalence, but if I were running an MSP, this is one of the partners I'd pick.

We use Field Effect Covalence to safeguard our network and users across both our physical locations and cloud environments. Its integration seamlessly extends to all our tools, encompassing AWS, Azure, and Office 365. Additionally, we maintain physical appliances at our offices to further enhance security. Furthermore, Field Effect Covalence effectively tracks outstanding updates and security threats on our endpoint devices.

We sought to reduce our threat landscape, and Field Effect Covalence provided us with the visibility to do so. They provided valuable insights into the vulnerabilities we needed to address, enabling us to enhance our overall security posture.

It is extremely important that Covalence is backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks and risks. This continuous monitoring is a cornerstone of our security posture. We highly value the thoroughness of their monitoring, which not only alerts us to errors for prompt action but also oversees the availability of the appliances at our installer locations. This vigilance ensures that even if a device goes offline in a remote area without readily available technical personnel, we are immediately notified and can address the issue promptly. Maintaining uninterrupted access to the platform is crucial for our operations.

Covalence is easy to manage. The online portal is intuitive and user-friendly, and their agents provide periodic check-ins to ensure we're always up-to-date on the latest features. Occasionally, we receive calls from company representatives who demonstrate new features and inquire about their potential impact on our operations. Overall, the platform is exceedingly user-friendly, and we've encountered no issues.

We utilize security threat tagging to prioritize action items for immediate attention. While we review recommendations to determine their implementation feasibility, we also identify higher-risk items that may not have immediate visibility. This tagging approach provides valuable insights, enabling us to address any overlooked issues.

Covalence is comprehensive. It's not the only tool that we use, but it is one of the most important, and it covers the majority of our use cases.

Covalence helps save us hours per month.

It has augmented what we would have had for cybersecurity previously.

Covalence's recommendations for remediating and responding to threats have positively impacted our security operations. For some time, this has enhanced our flexibility and provided us with greater insight into the situation. This flexibility has enabled us to take action on any outstanding items that may have previously lacked visibility in our insider intelligence.

Covalence's recommendations are crucial to our operations. We heavily rely on their guidance to improve our security posture and mitigate potential threats.

The ARO alerts are helpful to use almost daily to get a sense of what actions we need to take to expedite security measures. These alerts align with our security needs. When the updates are released, they show us whether our endpoints need to be patched, if there have been login attempts from suspicious locations, or if our systems are compromised. Since the alerts go directly to our inboxes, we can review them promptly and address any security concerns.

I would like Covalence to implement patch management as well.

It would be beneficial to add the ability to create groups for endpoint devices within the portal.

I have been using Field Effect Covalence for four years

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

Field Effect Covalence scales well.

Our customer support team is consistently prompt in responding to our inquiries via email or phone. We primarily communicate with them through email, and they are always quick to reply. Their expertise in addressing our concerns is consistent.

Positive

The deployment is straightforward.

The Covalence team helped us with the implementation.

Although Covalence is expensive, it provides good value for the price.

I would rate Field Effect Covalence ten out of ten.

Covalence only requires minimal patch updates with no other maintenance.

I highly recommend Field Effect Covalence. The amount of unseen threats is unbelievable and Field Effect Covalence brings them to light.

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.

I use Field Effect Covalence primarily for EDR across various clients. It serves as a crucial layer of backup protection, enhancing overall security measures. The valance feature is particularly appreciated for its effectiveness in safeguarding our systems.

In the beginning, our main goal was to provide our clients with the best possible cybersecurity solution, and that's when we implemented Covalence. The primary objective was to ensure top-notch security, and so far, it has proven effective – we haven't experienced any breaches since its implementation.

The main benefit I have experienced with Covalence over the years is the peace of mind it provides. I don't have to worry about anything – it is a reliable product that has never been hacked.

The most valuable aspects of Covalence for me are the exceptional customer service and the support from the dedicated team.

In terms of improvement, I have discussed with Covalence about improving reporting for vendors like us. While the reporting is good, I would like more of a white-label option with my company's name at the top and a clean look for the report, perhaps with "Field Effect" or "Covalence" at the bottom. They are already working on it, which is great.

I have been using Field Effect Covalence for about a year.

We have not experienced any issues with the stability of Covalence.

The customer support is excellent. They are very fast and helpful. I would rate the support as a ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial deployment of the solution is straightforward.

The pricing for Covalence is great.

It is extremely important to me that Covalence is backed by experts for constant monitoring of attacks and risks.

Managing surveillance with Covalence is super easy. It is user-friendly to the point that even someone without extensive technical knowledge finds it straightforward to handle.

It significantly helps our security team save time in various ways. We are spared from manual monitoring, and we no longer need to rely on other products that may not be as trustworthy.

Covalence is replacing multiple cybersecurity solutions for us. We are in the process of phasing out some, including Arctic Wolf, as we find that Covalence meets our needs more effectively.

Covalence informs me of threats and provides clear recommendations on how to address them. I find the recommendations to be wonderful, making it easy to address and hunt for the rest of the potential threats.

My advice to new users is that Covalence is like our secret weapon in cybersecurity. It might be newer and not widely known yet, but I would strongly advise them not to overlook it – implementing it is a smart move. Overall, I would rate the solution as a nine out of ten.

The main reason we wanted to have an MDR system was to monitor our network both internally and externally for any potential threats or risks that we might have that could create a problem for the business. That's the main reason for it. 

I like the solution in part due to the fact that it is Canadian-based, so being from Canada, I like to work with Canadian vendors if possible. It is very comprehensive, and the price point is better than some of the others that I looked at, which were more expensive, for example, Arctic Wolf and eSentire, and some of the other sick security solutions on the market.

We get regular AROs that alert us of anything that we need to be aware of that's happening. The ARO features are really important since they're also ranked by risk. Something that's high or critical would get our immediate attention. And then medium and low, these are things that we know that we need to address. However, we've got a little bit more time to take a look at them. We've got a really small IT team, and I can't afford to have a full-time security person working for me. Having this as a service where their analysts are reviewing the incidents as they come up is helpful. They can help us troubleshoot or understand the source of the issue. That is really, really important for us as we have no way of doing this otherwise with a team of three people.

I like that surveillance is backed by experts who are constantly monitoring for attacks and risks. That's really the key selling point for me. I want my system to be constantly monitored. You want to know what's happening at all times within the network or even on some of our cloud services. For example, we use Microsoft 365. If someone's trying to hack one of our user's accounts, I want to know that that's happening. With this product, I would get an alert for that.

The ease of managing the product is great. I don't do it myself on a day-to-day basis. The team does it. However, the team likes the software. They understand how it works. When they need assistance, they can ask one of the security experts who will help them do the analysis and understand exactly what's happening, why it's happening, and help them resolve the issue. We've activated the active response, so when there's a risk where they see a particular user account that looks like it may have been infiltrated, it will automatically shut that down. That way, if something is happening, they shut the door right away so that if it's a hack or trying to get in, no one is going to get access.

We make use of the tagging of security threats such as actions, recommendations, and observations. We also have the add-ins for Outlook, as phishing has become prolific now. We're getting a lot of phishing emails. We've trained our employees to be alert when they see a phishing email. They know that they can go and click on the Covalence button in Outlook to report that message. The team is alerted that there was a phishing email that came in that way. In addition to that, when they click that button, it asks them a few simple questions about what actions they've taken. For example, did they click on a link? Did they open a document? Did they actually do anything that might be triggering some kind of a virus or something like that in our network? Covalence gets that information, and they can assess if there's a risk there. 

We now have a single cybersecurity product that protects all of our threat services, and all the endpoints. East, West, North, South - it covers everything on all of our entry points. That's one of the big selling points is that every endpoint and every access point is covered.

Covalence helps our security team save some time. Since I don't actually have a full-time security team, it's really great. The IT team doesn't really have a lot of time to dedicate to security. And they aren't experts. They're more generalists. Therefore, just having access to true expertise in security is really, really important to me. And they're monitoring 24/7. My guys go home at night; they're not necessarily looking at any of the systems to see if something's going on. Having the alerts that come into all of our phones allows us to see right away if there's a high or critical alert, and we can immediately address it whatever time of day it is.

Besides the AROs that are really specific to my network, I get regular monthly reports. They include, for example, when there's a major threat that's out there that's been identified. They'll send out an email, and I can read up on that and determine if there's any risk to my organization.

Cylance gives recommendations on how to reduce risk. We meet regularly with the Covalence team, and we go over the status of our AROs, some of the situations that happened, any concerns, and things like that. They definitely provide recommendations as well on alert observations. Some of the recommendations are less of a priority for us. However, we definitely want to follow through on those so that we're closing the door on any possible threats.

I'd love the price to be a little bit less. I've been in IT for 25 years and security is obviously causing my budget to really balloon from what it used to be. I'm always looking to make things more cost-effective. 

While the interface is pretty good, they could always improve on it and make it more user-friendly. Darktrace, for example, has a really nice interface, however, its functionality wasn't necessarily what we needed. 

We originally started using the solution in February or March of 2022. However, I worked with it at a different company as well and used it there since 2019.

We've had no issues with stability at all. 

The solution is completely scalable. We went through a growth phase last year, and they were able to keep up with that. 

My team has contacted technical support, typically about pretty minor stuff. In the tear we've been on it, we've reached out maybe one to two times. They offer prompt responses. I've never heard anyone complain about them. 

Positive

It did not replace any cybersecurity solutions. However, we did not have anything like this in place. We did look at alternative solutions before we made the decision to go with Covalence. However, we did not really have much of anything other than your basic antivirus software. We needed proactive instead of reactive security, which is why we chose this product.

While I authorized its use, I was not involved in the initial deployment. My staff was. There were two people who handled the implementation. It was mostly handled by one individual, however.

It's maintained by the vendor, and they do that remotely.

I've never sat down and calculated the ROI.

While they were very competitive compared to some of the other ones we looked at, I'm always looking to reduce my costs.

I'm a customer and end-user.

If someone was interested in an MDR system, I would definitely tell them to look at this product and include them in any vendor comparison that they were doing. They're very comparable to the other bigger, more well-known MDR solution providers out there. They bring a lot to the table. The company was founded with members from the Canadian National Defense. They really know what needs to be done at the highest levels of security, and they were able to take that knowledge and experience and build a solution that is comparable to all of the others out there. 

They're a good team to work with. It's really important to me to have a team who are responsive and good to work with. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.