SentinelOne Singularity Complete Reviews

It's pretty good. The best thing is it has a secure shell command that you can use to get into any endpoint and do some jobs. That's a pretty cool feature. 

It's pretty much the same as similar typical solutions. It is a CrowdStrike, or SentinelOne, or Windows Defender. They do the same thing. 

The pricing is pretty good. 

It's probably not that top-notch like CrowdStrike or Microsoft Defender. However, it's okay, it's not bad. 

The only problem I have is they don't manually review the threat files. That's the only thing I'm concerned about.

The support needs improvement. There are some limitations. 

I've used the solution for less than six months. 

It is a very stable product. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. I'd rate it a nine out of ten. 

No matter what software you use, you need to do some fine-tuning.

The solution is scalable. You can pretty much deploy to anywhere.

In terms of if we need to send them some actual threat, they cannot manually verify it. That's the limitation of the company. However, for Microsoft, or Symantec, or CrowdStrike, you can actually submit a threat file, then they can manually review it. That's the only thing I've found so far with SentinelOne. The support is not that good. Obviously, probably eventually, they will get it in one year or two years' time; however, right now, it's not there.

I've used CrowdStrike, Carbon Black, and Microsoft Defender as well. 

SentinelOne, CrowdStrike, and Carbon Black do the pretty much same thing. It all depends on the money.

The good thing about Microsoft and CrowdStrike is they can detect the device based on the traffic they're coming from. This is one of the advantages you have. With SentinelOne, this is where they're lacking. For example, for Windows Defender, if you're using your phone, you can figure out it's coming from your phone, or as long as it's coming to your enterprise network, you will know where it's coming from. This is one of the things I could not find in SentinelOne. You can only define it once you deploy it. However, without a proper deployment, you can't actually see it. For the other technologies, even though you don't deploy them, you can actually have a good understanding of the entire fleet and what's happening. For example, all emails are going to Office 365, so that's another way you get an excellent picture of the inventory assets. That's a very good NDM thing that you got it for free. With SentinelOne, they're not to that level yet.

The initial setup is easy. It's even simpler than, for example, Windows Defender. 

The maintenance is very low. It depends on how big the organization is. The false positive rate is very low. Obviously, it should be maintained by a team. Regardless, if it's Windows Defender, CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, or Symantec, it has to be built and looked after by a soft team.

For the functionality you get, the pricing is pretty good. I'd rate it four out of five in terms of affordability.

I was actually evaluating Windows Defender. I just want to check to see the selling points and the advantages of having Defender over Symantec products.

I didn't do a technical job; I just evaluated the product. I don't have a partnership with SentinelOne. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. They are pretty good overall. 

In comparison to CrowdStrike, they use a lot of ICANN fees in the UI. But this isn't a problem for me because I am already familiar with CrowdStrike's interface and navigation panel. I still don't use the hamburger mini version of CrowdStrike because I am used to the old panels.

The rollback issue isn't marketed by CrowdStrike. I'm certain of it. We can, however, do it indirectly. If you want to do rollback in craft with RTR over Windows shadow copies, there is a workaround. 

This is an argument I occasionally use against SentinelOne. If you use rollback, your system has already been infected. CrowdStrike claims, that they don't do this, they are not a backup solution, and they don't allow any ransomware to work in their systems. 

By the way, rollback is a plus in the eyes of customers.

If CrowdStrike can do it with a single click, it will be a great turn of events.

The ability to get queries by pressing the "tab" button is a plus for SentinelOne.

SentinelOne makes it more difficult to define users.

It is difficult to manage users in SentinelOne.

There are many defining roles. It is granular, but it is also complicated. It is more granular than CrowdStrike, but it is not preferred because you have to check hundreds of roles. It's a challenge.

This user assignment feature would be more efficient. It would be fantastic if they could design it.

In comparison to CrowdStrike, EDR is less detailed. CrowdStrike provides more information about an adversary than SentinelOne.

Having a good EDR is a huge plus. In my opinion, it earns two points. The number will be nine if they can expand it with a more detailed one. 

I could complain about SentinelOne's pricing right now, but I am sure CrowdStrike is using its own staff to provide its clients with a complete solution. Being expensive is a little more reasonable than you think. 

Most people want to know why CrowdStrike is more expensive than other options.

CrowdStrike can assist you with their technical personnel, and CrowdStrike is the only provider who can assist you with their own threat hunters. SentinelOne is not currently doing this.

I have been using SentinelOne for three weeks.

I deployed it on my computer. I am testing it and trying to evaluate what is missing between the two products. I would like to see both of their advantages and disadvantages, which are not written. I am trying to gain real-life experience with these products. I have a lab. 

On these virtual machines, I have at least ten vendors. Some are legacy antiviruses, while others are next-generation antiviruses. I have worked with a variety of brands. These labs are being used for comparison.

I use automatic updates. As a result, it's most likely the most recent version.

The thing is, I can't say a thing about it because I need to digest a lot of data and launch a lot of attacks on SentinelOne, which I haven't done much of. Two or three assaults.

It was successful in prevention and detection, but I need to try some other methods to see if I can bypass SentinelOne.

This solution is currently being used by only two people. Myself and one of my teammates.

Not right now because things will be different in the real world, but we are only two computers with SentinelOne. So we didn't have that kind of experience right now.

When compared to CrowdStrike, the initial setup is more complex.

It only took me 10 minutes to install it on two PCs.

At this time it is only a trial. After the trial period, I am going to purchase two licenses from SentinelOne. To make comparisons too and continue investigating both products.

We simply want to compare in real-life conditions CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft, and other legacy antiviruses such as McAfee, Micro, and so on.

If you are running an enterprise business, you should definitely go with CrowdStrike, but if you are on a tight budget, you could look into SentinelOne, but CrowdStrike is the better option. If you can stretch your budget.

If you need next-generation antivirus and EDR solutions or if your budget is limited, you can consider SentinelOne, but if you can increase your budget or convince your management to increase your budget, CrowdStrike would be ideal.

I am simply checking. I am not a customer. I am not a partner. I'm a CrowdStrike partner. I am only using it for my own needs. Because people frequently inquire about the differences between other brands and CrowdStrike. 

People come to me for CrowdStrike assistance. And I have to explain the key differences between the two products. And BattleKart does not accurately reflect the information. When compared to BattleKarts, the real-time experience is more valuable.

I would rate SentinelOne a seven out of ten.

This is an anti-malware and threat management product. We are customers of SentinelOne and I'm a system engineer.

We chose SentinelOne because of the protection it offers against ransomware. It provides good security that gives peace of mind.

We sometimes have issues with the disc space and that's because of the anti-ransomware technology they use. The volume of shadow copies becomes too large and we have to manage that. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

This is a stable product. 

The solution is scalable, we have around 500 users in the company. 

I have issued some tickets to technical support and they were very responsive. 

Positive

We use an in-house person along with a third-party consultant for implementation.

I believe that SentinelOne is quite an expensive solution. 

This is a good product, but it has some issues so I rate it eight out of 10. 

I use it for company computers in reference to end-point protection scanning for malware, hunting for malware on the network, and on the devices. 

One is the behavioral engine and the AI are both built into the agent, so it doesn't need the internet. 

The interface is good and it is easy to use. The engine that they use to look for malware and for viruses is very good. 

There are features that I would like them to add. They have little to do with endpoint protection, but if they could add encryption and DLP on, it would make it even better. 

I have been working with SentinelOne for just over a year now.

Yeah, it is stable. It does not use a lot of computer resources, even though the engine is built into the agent. If there are new updates, it alerts you when the updates are there and need to be installed. SentinelOne is an efficient solution.

Yes, it is scalable.

I have not had any issues that I needed to talk to customer support about.

The initial setup is very straightforward and easy. Once you install it, auto-updates are initialized. When you put in watches, you are searching for items, you need customization, and you add or remove rules, which is quite easy.

I use in-house implementation.

We are seeing a return on our investment.

The licensing is okay. I don't think it is bad. Depending on which one you get, I think it is fifty dollars for each user annually. The more users you have, the cheaper it is.

I use all security tools from SIMS to DAMs, to DLP solutions, firewalls, etc.

For me, the experience has been very good. I would rate SentinelOne a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for security. It’s for endpoint and response detection.

It is primarily protecting all my servers now, and most of the end users are connected to SharePoint OneDrive and emails, which are already taken care of from Microsoft through endpoint security. I don't have to really worry too much from the end-user point of view. Still, in case if they ever happen to click on any of the phishing emails or malicious files, it will block their computer immediately without even coming through the server level.

It is covering one of my IT audit purposes - not only from the protection of the data and doing security through my network but also addresses most of the compliances from an audit point of view.

It is very effective so far. It has saved us from a couple of ransomware attacks already. I'm very impressed.

They support most of the operating systems that we use - not just Windows or not just prominent versions of Apple or Linux. I have various versions that support almost all the operating systems in the market.

If there is any suspicious activity, they just straight away block the computer from further infection. The moment we call the support, they investigate everything in detail. Only then will they release it - if they find it is okay. During their own verification, they’ll see how it works and will not give access to the IT admin or to me. Only they will enable it when they are sure it is safe. The responsibility is taken off of us and onto them completely.

It is all automated. If any user or any Sentinel client is having an issue, the email alert will come, and we'll have to just look at it.

It's complete and total protection.

I cannot speak to any missing features. It has what we need.

If they can extend their product further on the DLP side of it so that I don't have to have another agent run exclusively for DLP production, that would be ideal.

I’ve been using the solution for a bit more than six months now.

The solution is absolutely stable. There are no bugs or glitches.

I haven't seen all the features. However, I will probably start looking at it since it has saved us from a couple of cyber attacks. Probably I will take a walk-through again from the technical team to understand if there are any further scalable options to implement on my infrastructure.

We are using it for service only right now. However, we have decided to scale up for all the end users.

Support is very good, and their help is immediate.

Positive

I'm still using VDAT on Windows endpoints. We use Defender. Windows is comprehensive as well. Most Windows users with personal PCs have Windows Defender, and it works well. That said, I was not sure and still am not sure how well it will protect the servers if there is any ransomware attack on the network.

It’s very easy to implement the solution. It’s not complex at all. I’d rate it a five out of five in terms of ease of implementation.

For me to implement across eight servers, it took maybe a day. Two days at a maximum.

It’s on the cloud and therefore doesn’t require maintenance.

They did the implementation. However, I installed the agent. Everything and the configuration were already set. They just guided me through how exactly it was set up. They did the walk-through of the complete product, and that's it.

We’ve already seen a 100% ROI even after just a few months. I’d rate it five out of five.

We pay to license every year. However, I’m not sure of the pricing. They might cost $100 each. It’s reasonably priced. I’d rate it four out of five in terms of affordability.

I did compare it to other solutions and found this product to be more compatible with more operating systems.

We are using the latest version of the solution.

I highly recommend the solution to others.

We’re just customers.

I’d rate the solution nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for EDR to protect critical devices.

The AI feature is great, as are its automatic features. The solution can scan for malware easily. And then the ransomware protection is excellent.

It's pretty easy to set up.

The technical support is great.

The product can scale.

The solution just needs to step up and take on other solutions. Some are a bit stronger in comparison.

My improvements have been qualitative. For example, previously they didn't have a mobile device solution. However, two months ago, or three months ago they released the mobile version. Previously, they could only cover Linux, Windows, and macOS. However, two months, three months ago roughly, they start supporting mobile devices.

I'd like to see more documentation. 

SentinelOne documentation is only available to partners or people who own SentinelOne. There is no public documentation of SentinelOne. With other EDRs you can literally fix your problem by going to the documentation publicly. There is always public documentation. However, with this product,  public documentation is hidden from subscribers. If you Google some SentinelOne issue, you don't find any answers. There needs to be more public information about the product.

We added some sessions with a customer to go through testing, including a UAT session and testing session of the solution, and the customer listed some things they wanted to see in the solution. 

I've been dealing with the solution for 14 months. 

Overall, the solution is between 90%  and 95% stable. Sometimes it causes a blue screen and causes the device to crash. It causes servers or computers to crash. That's a huge gamble. You could install SentinelOne on your computer and if you do, there's the risk that your production machine could go down when SentinelOne came on. Stability is a gamble for SentinelOne. There's more chance of crashing your computer. And the only solution when that happens is to go and install it through safe mode.

The product is actually scalable.

Our customers are small, medium, and enterprise companies. We support all of them, both small and medium enterprising arms.

SentinelOne technical support is awesome. If there is a five-star option, I'd give them six stars. They give good support.

Positive

I'm also working with CrowdStrike Falcon. I have worked with Carbon Black as well. SentinelOne is better than Carbon Black.

The priority of EDR before any complex feature is the ability to detect and then prevent malware attacks. That will be main reason of an EDR. SentinelOne does a very good job of detection of online threats. Once you get targeted by a ransomware attack, SentinelOne will notice that. Carbon Black doesn't do that.

The implementation process is pretty easy. 

The pricing is reasonable. I'm an engineer and therefore can't speak to exact pricing. 

We're a partner.

We sell SentinelOne. We implement and deploy. We have a partnership, basically. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

My advice to other users is if you are going to any solution out there, number one is to make sure if there are issues tey can be easily fixed. With this product, you won't have to have a problem going for three months unsolved or going for two months unsolved. 

We are a Dutch distributor working for Infinigate, a company specializing in distributing security solutions across Europe. One of our vendors is SonicWall. 

The instant rollback for Windows support is a nice feature.

Certificate distribution is quite easy, for example, using BitBucket SSL Inspection in conjunction with the firewall. More and more web traffic is via HTTPS, everybody is sending encrypted data, which needs to be decrypted for security purposes, then delivered. The integration of SentinelOne and the SonicWall Capture Client makes certificate distribution easy, which is needed for a SSL security setup.  

The 365 management and analytics from the cloud is another great feature.

It would be good to see some small tools to test files or hashes that are a potential threat, I know there are already products offering this.

We have been distributing this solution to our clients for two to three years.

The stability is fine, I haven't heard about any serious issues. 

Within the cloud, the solution is as scalable as required. The CapEX is quite low and you can scale this solution for thousands of users. 

Within our company, we use a Sophos product, as we have been working with them for 25 years and have a more established relationship. 

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward. As soon as you install it, the policy is sent from the cloud, and perhaps some certificates, and you are up and running, so that's relatively easy. I would rate the setup experience a four out of five, as there is always room for improvement.

When I open my browser, and I'm behind the SonicWall firewall without Capture Client my browser will tell me that I cannot browse the internet until I install the client. Then there is a button in the browser to install it, I click on it as a user, and after a few minutes, I'm up and running. Now I can browse again, but with a client, so it's pretty easy.

As a distributor, we advise our resellers and they sell it to their end customers, so most of the time the resellers implement. I often give demos and training, where I show them how to do it. From a distributor role, most of the installations are done by our resellers.

The CapEX is very low because you don't have to buy any management tools or install them on your hardware. It's all based in the cloud and comes with cloud advantages. 

Just buy the Capture Client and buy the installer itself in a license of 100,000, or whatever is needed. You don't need to invest in any management tools because they are already installed, and maintenance from the client will keep everything up and running. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would advise people to consider this solution, because the combination of SentinelOne and SonicWall Capture ATP is very powerful. I would also advise people to have a look at the Capture Client and test the differences with other AVs.

SentinelOne has a patented feature with a Sandboxing technique, they have four Sandboxing techniques. They also have an AI technique, machine learning from SonicWall, and millions of sensors around the world to detect threats and zero-day attacks. This corroboration of security threat data shared by everyone makes the solution a powerful security engine. As Capture ATP also works on the firewall, it's not only their AV clients who are feeding the machine learning and the threat data, but also their firewalls.

My client uses the solution for endpoint security and email security.

I have found the most valuable feature to be the rapid threat detection. 

We need to analyze the threats and make decisions based on that, so the analytics could be better at analyzing exactly where the threats are coming from.

One of my clients has been using the product for about three years.

My client has said that it is stable. 

It is a scalable solution.

We received a response from technical support within 48 hours. The support is great.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten.