ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Reviews

Users submit applications for installation, and I typically review them, granting or denying access as needed. While the volume isn't high, ThreatLocker Protect provides significant peace of mind knowing users aren't installing unauthorized or malicious software. Our biggest challenge has been user errors causing support requests. To address this, I've implemented rules for applications frequently used in daily operations. It's had a learning curve, but the effectiveness has been noticeable.

Making approval or denial decisions on requests is pretty straightforward for me. I haven't encountered any problems. However, I can see how it might be a bit confusing for less technical users. Things like allowing hashes and understanding all the terminology could be stumbling blocks. Still, I believe anyone with a few months to a year of IT experience would find it manageable. And of course, I was able to grasp it myself.

While allowlisting can help verify specific access requests, it doesn't guarantee overall trust as requests can still originate from compromised sources. In my experience, the zero trust model has proven the most effective approach. Its principle of "never trust, always verify" minimizes risk by scrutinizing every access, regardless of origin. We haven't encountered any security breaches with clients who implemented it, suggesting its efficacy. While antivirus remains a valuable layer of defense, I believe the zero trust framework, particularly in conjunction with ThreatLocker, offers the most robust security posture we've encountered. Thankfully, we haven't experienced any issues with this combination so far.

ThreatLocker Protect provides us with peace of mind. It's a game-changer. With it in place, we can be confident that employees are only using authorized applications, minimizing surprises and freeing up our time for other aspects of our work. We used to spend significant time dealing with malware, but that burden has been greatly reduced. Peace of mind is truly the main benefit.

Allowlisting has significantly reduced the number of tickets we receive from compromised accounts. It's eliminated them. However, we still get tickets from users who are confused about the new process, need things approved, or are feeling impatient. While the volume has decreased, these legitimate tickets related to access limitations are still present. Ultimately, we believe this trade-off is worth it for the sake of enhanced security. This is what we communicated to the team.

Implementing an allowlist has not only freed up our help desk staff for other projects but also aligns with my preference for approved application lists on both mobile devices and computers. This approach ensures smooth operation with minimal complications, and a positive outcome overall.

We utilize allowlisting alongside other security measures, with ThreatLocker as an additional layer. This choice stems from the absence of other comprehensive endpoint protection solutions, ensuring ThreatLocker doesn't overlap with existing safeguards. Therefore, it complements our antivirus for all users.

It initially took a couple of months for us to fully appreciate the benefits of ThreatLocker. While we put our people in learning mode for approximately a week to understand normal system processes, it wasn't until the lack of suspicious activity became evident that we truly recognized the impact. This doesn't diminish the importance of our existing security measures, including sound user guidance, phishing training, and other protocols that discourage risky behavior and minimize software installation needs. In essence, it took some time for the benefits of ThreatLocker to become fully apparent due to the effectiveness of our pre-existing security practices.

When new files arrive and people mention they've been tested twice in the virtual environment, I like to double-check for potential malware by scanning them on VirusTotal and other antivirus platforms. This adds an extra layer of security, which is especially helpful when I'm unsure about approving a file and research doesn't provide clear answers. The sandbox functionality is fantastic. It bolsters my confidence considerably, as it can reveal suspicious behavior like registry modifications even if initial scans are inconclusive. Overall, these features have been game-changers for me.

The current process for viewing software approval requests from end users has room for improvement. While it's generally functional, some users find it confusing. This can be due to either unfamiliarity with the process, unexpected appearance of the request window, or lack of clear instructions. Additionally, the notification box might not be sufficiently noticeable, as some users have reported missing it entirely.

Adding applications to the allowlist can sometimes feel overwhelming. The numerous fields, coupled with navigating the unfamiliar portal, can be daunting, especially on our first attempt. Even with explanations, recalling the necessary information and understanding the required actions for file inclusion can be tricky. I believe the initial learning curve for allowlisting is relatively steep. However, once mastered, it proves to be a valuable tool. My main concern lies with the initial learning hurdle.

I have been using ThreatLocker Protect for around four months.

ThreatLocker Protect has been mostly stable over the past six months. We did experience a single outage that lasted a day, which was disruptive due to pending approvals. However, this has been the only major incident in that timeframe, suggesting overall good stability.

ThreatLocker scales well and has been successfully deployed on all our required devices. We offer it as part of a premium package, but due to its higher cost, adoption among our clients is currently limited. Nevertheless, it meets our scalability needs effectively.

The implementation was relatively straightforward. We developed components or scripts for deployment to devices, avoiding major complications. Furthermore, we have a remote management tool in place for efficient installation.

Installing on everyone's machines is a fairly quick process, typically taking an hour with online devices. While it doesn't require much time, we recently spent two hours on calls with someone to guide us through it. This was because our previous setup, done by someone else in the company, had some errors. We've rectified them now, but it meant changing a few things. Overall, deployment should be smooth and swift, requiring two people and around an hour if all the devices are online.

The implementation was completed internally by our team. Given our extensive experience deploying vulnerability scanners for assessments, this process was relatively straightforward.

I would rate ThreatLocker Protect a seven out of ten. The learning curve is quite steep, especially for those without extensive IT experience. I found it challenging to master and had to rely on my team for guidance on several occasions. Even my manager isn't completely comfortable with it yet. However, once we overcome the initial hurdle, it truly shines.

ThreatLocker requires minimal maintenance, except for one recent instance where we reviewed its configuration. While it's designed to automatically update on user machines, I noticed some devices hadn't yet received the latest version. I manually initiated the update for these devices. The cause of the delay is unclear, though the devices are online, so it might be a network issue.

Ensure all future ThreatLocker users are thoroughly briefed on its functionality. We've encountered surprises among some users regarding the approval requirement for new activities. To avoid such issues, we recommend comprehensive pre-deployment communication, outlining ThreatLocker's purpose, features, and approval process.

It's a solution for software whitelisting. It blocks applications from running. If there is any DLL or something else running on your computer, the admin or admins of the service get an alert. If an end-user is trying to install something that has been blocked by the organization, the admins get alerted.

We can sleep easier knowing viruses aren't installing things, employees aren't installing things, and nothing is running without someone getting an alert and having eyes on it and approving it.

Ringfencing is a great feature. There is grainy clarity. You can get down into the Ringfencing where you can either completely ring-fence something or you can manually choose what you want it to reach out to. The combination of Allowlisting with Ringfencing for blocking unknown threats and attacks is a great combination because you want to allow the software, but then you, as an admin, are not aware of what every piece of software does. So, you wanna start off being strict and just allow the application, but you would want to ring-fence it in case it beacons out to the internet or goes over ports that you don't think it should be traversing across. That's ringfencing, and it blocks that, but then when the end-user reaches back and says that a part of this software isn't working as it should be, then you can get into that granularity where you can look at the ringfencing policy. You can adjust the ringfencing policy from the strictest to allowing certain parts.

Establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from, is a wonderful thing, and it's needed, but it can hinder and slow down. It adds steps for the end-users because they can't just go wild and install whatever they want, but ultimately, that's one of the main reasons why we invested in ThreatLocker and why we love it because it actually works as they say it should.

In terms of Allowlisting helping us reduce our organization’s help desk tickets, it's twofold because if we didn't have this, we would be getting tons of help desk tickets about bad things happening in the company because people are allowed to install whatever they want. They could be watching Twitch, YouTube, etc. They could be installing video games, which in itself would then create tons of help desk tickets for us. On the other hand, anytime someone wants to install something, we would get a help desk ticket for it. So, either way, we'd be getting help desk tickets, but at least the help desk tickets that we're getting for ThreatLocker are the type we want because now we know we're safe and secure and we're ahead of the curve for safety. Instead of being a reactive help desk ticket where you install something, and your computer is broken, now it's more proactive where you raise a ticket to install something, and your computer is not infected. We don't have to spend hours reimaging, tracking things down, being a victim of ransomware, etc.

Allowlisting has helped to free up help desk staff for other projects because now, we can allow elevation, and we can allow the approvals from an admin through it. We don't have to send people physically to go to a person's desk to do installations or set up online meetings with them to share out where we can assist with the installs. It has freed up time for the help desk staff.

Allowlisting has helped to consolidate applications and tools. We now get to see what everyone is trying to install, and we can find out why people are installing a particular application when another one has already been approved to do the same type of thing. Previously, we didn't know about that. One of the big ones would be SolidWorks. A lot of people have looked at three applications for drawing, and when we see that coming through for a request, we can suggest and ask them what about SolidWorks, and then they use that.

Feature-wise, the learning mode and the fact that it's blocking everything are the most valuable. I don't see why more companies don't use the type of product.

I like how it blocks everything. The learning mode is another feature that I like. It operates in the learning mode in the beginning. When you first get it set up in your environment, you don't want every computer to not be able to work and not be able to run the normal fresh install of Windows or other operating systems, so when we first got it set up, we were able to put it into learning mode, which was wonderful. The learning mode is a great feature they have where the computer allows everything and just learns about your typical environment and then makes a good baseline from there.

The idea that it can block everything is wonderful because, in our company, we have to follow the cybersecurity requirements of the Department of Defense. They have very strict guidelines. This software helps us meet and cross off the many cybersecurity checklists for the environment, especially for software installs and what's allowed to run in our environment. That's one of the greatest features.

Its graphical user interface is very intuitive. It's very well laid out and detailed, and it's very easy to find things. I don't have anything to suggest to them in that regard. I've made other suggestions to their company for some features, but for the way its interface is or for proving things or how to use it, I've had no suggestions.

A great thing is that you have to be their customer, but with no extra add-on, you can have access to their ThreatLocker university, where you can learn and watch videos on how to do everything.

Another great thing is that they have online cyber heroes, and I have never created a ticket and waited more than five minutes until a live person was on my check. They're immediately able to get into my tenant. They can set up a Zoom call and share their screen and show me exactly what I'm missing or where to go.

You need to have ThreatLocker agent software on every client or every computer that you want to be protected by the ThreatLocker Allowlisting application. If you have a thousand computers with ThreatLocker agents on them, when you approve or create a new policy saying that Adobe Reader that matches this hashtag and meets certain criteria is allowed to be installed, it applies at the top level or the organization level. It applies to every computer in the company. When you make that new policy and push it out and it goes out and updates all of the clients. Unfortunately, at this time, it does not look like they stagger the push-out. If your company only has a 100-megabytes internet line and you send out that update of 1 megabyte to a thousand computers, because it's sending that out to a thousand at the same time, you're using up a thousand megabytes right there. So, you could saturate your network. We have suggested they stagger it. If the system sees that there are a thousand computers, it should just try to send out to a hundred, and after that's completed, send out to the next hundred. That way, it's not saturating your network.

Other than that, feature-wise, it's a great solid product. I have not come up with anything that they should do. Even when I thought I had an issue, they showed me that I have to look here to adjust that setting. For example, when you first join a computer, it automatically puts that computer in learning mode. You can set the time for how long it automatically stays in the mode. I believe the default setting was a month or something like that, and we thought that was too long. Their cyber heroes helped me find the area to adjust that. They already had the solution for that. I just wasn't aware of it.

We have been using it since September 2021.

The part that can cause bandwidth issues is one of the only things where I see companies not going with them, but they probably wouldn't know that until they finally get to use the product. That would be the only downfall to it.

It grows with your company, and it learns with your company. It's very good with scalability. They're always pushing updates. It's learning all the newest software that comes out. It's picking up. I'd rate it a 10 out of 10 in terms of scalability.

It's required on every computer and every server in our company nationwide. We're pretty small. Our computer count is 225. We have 120 users, but we have servers. Some people have multiple computers. We have lab computers. We have computers that are just stationary set up to 3D printers. Every computer has to have it. That's why we have more computers than employees.

Their support is phenomenal. I rarely say that about customer support. We all have had our nightmares with certain customer support scenarios, but I've not run into any issues with ThreatLocker. They are one of the best. I've been in this industry for over eighteen years. Not just in this industry, but also as a person, you deal with customer service everywhere you go, such as McDonald's, Target, Comcast, Verizon, etc. ThreatLocker support is one of the best I've ever experienced. I'd rate them a 10 out of 10.

Positive

We didn't use a similar solution before. The closest solution we ever used was to whitelist the internet. So, you cannot go out to any website unless you've requested it, and it has been approved. Once we approve it, anyone can go to that website. We used a proxy for our internet traffic.

I personally don't physically deploy it. It gets pushed out by our software center. Any new computer gets the client installed, and then that client with API package and everything else reaches back to and joins our tenant, and then we see it in the dashboard. My role is to make sure that every new machine has it. I am the admin for our company for ThreatLocker. I do audits on what the system sees as how many computers we have connected to ThreatLocker, and make sure that I'm deleting any computer that was removed from our domain. If any new computer joins, I have to make sure that it does register in ThreatLocker because sometimes, because of an internal networking error or something else, computers get the client, but it doesn't beacon out and get associated with our tenant. So, I have to do that.

Its implementation was very quick. Once we got it, it took maybe a week to work with the team to get everything staged. When it was first introduced, we left our computers in learning mode for several months, which is highly recommended. That's how we worked with ThreatLocker support and how they helped us get it all set up. After six months of learning our environment in terms of what's normal, what's allowed, and what they shouldn't block, the keys were handed over. We were told that this is our baseline and to go from there.

Its maintenance includes receiving updates on a new package. I also audit it because even though employees see a request pop up, not every employee would click on it because they won't know. So, I still need to audit. For example, a bad virus wants to run on Bill's computer. Bill will see a ThreatLocker popup saying this thing is trying to run. A lot of times, end-users think that they didn't run anything, so they just hit cancel, and I won't get alerted for that. So, I do have to physically go into the audit. Often, I look and just pull up an audit since the last time to see everything that got blocked. I go through it, and I still look for anything that was malicious because we still have to be aware of that so that we can take action.

The other part that I have to do maintenance on is just making sure that the license count is correct, and that the number of computers that the user interface says are registered is similar to what we have. I go in there and make sure that there are truly that many.

We have seen an ROI. Knowing that ransomware or viruses have been stopped and can't process, the savings pay for it.

Its time to value was within one week. In the first week, we got to see what was getting blocked. It was very eye-opening to see what was happening on all the computers with the processes that we were trying to run or install. It was definitely within the first week.

Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer.

I know my manager did evaluate other options. I don't recall which products were looked at, but their features were very similar. Their price was extremely high, especially compared to ThreatLocker. 

Before you buy, you need to educate your employees and let them know this is adding a safety step to the process of installing software. You also need to be prepared because if the admin isn't around, then you're going to slow down. The person is not going to be able to install the software. That is something you do need to be aware of.

It's extremely easy for an admin to approve or deny requests using Allowlisting. The only caveat to that is that because of the way that ThreatLocker is set up and how minutely you can dive down into a software install, there could be issues with some pieces of software. For example, I approve of you installing Adobe Reader. If you run that install from your desktop, and I approve it, there's a certain way to say I want it to approve this exact installation. What that means is that I approve it for that one person. If someone else tries to run that exact same install package, but it, for example, is not from the desktop and is from a shared drive or from a USB, because of that one tiny change, it will technically get blocked. To some people, it's a little confusing. If you understand how the system works, it's easy. You can use a wildcard to say this install package can be installed from any location. So, when you learn those little tips and tricks, it gets a whole lot easier, but in the very beginning, if you're fresh getting into this, or it was thrown in your lap and you were told that you're the administrator for ThreatLocker, it can be a little confusing. The great thing is that ThreatLocker has something called the install mode. Basically, you're putting a computer in a mode for a temporary amount of time, which the admin can control. When a computer is put into the install mode, ThreatLocker won't block anything. You can go ahead and run any executable. It'll allow the installation, and it'll apply it to that application or policy name that you wanna apply it to. If you're doing it for Adobe, you could add it to the Adobe Reader policy. So, it's very easy. Even if you had any issues, their support is phenomenal.

Overall, I'd rate ThreatLocker Allowlisting a 9 out of 10.

ThreatLocker is our standard security stack, with very few exceptions. We use it for all of our MSP clients, MSSP clients, and recently for IR response cases. We use ThreatLocker to control application installations and take advantage of its ring-fencing option, which prevents otherwise good applications from interacting maliciously.

Administrators can easily approve or deny requests using the log listings.

The overall visibility into software approval requests of end users is very good.

ThreatLocker and ring-fencing are two of the main ways to prevent applications from interacting with each other, outside of application control. This means that we can take two otherwise non-malicious applications and prevent them from speaking to each other. A good example is Microsoft Word and Microsoft PowerShell. We wouldn't want Word to interact with PowerShell.

From a visibility standpoint, we like Allowlisting's ability to establish trust from every access request, regardless of its origin. However, there is nothing quite like the application control feature, even in an XDR or EDR solution. We are looking for the process path, CERT, and other information to identify the application.

Allowlisting has helped reduce the number of our help desk tickets. There was an initial spike in configuring trusted applications, but it has definitely cut down on supporting applications that should not be part of an organization anyway, such as PDF readers and browsers outside of the standard. Once we add an acceptable group of applications, we no longer support any deviations from that. Allowlisting has cut down on some of the ticketing there.

Allowlisting has helped us consolidate applications and tools. For example, we have standardized on a list of allowed browsers because those are the browsers that are patched regularly. We have also standardized PDF readers and Office suites, such as LibreOffice and Microsoft Office.

We saw the benefits of Allowlisting quickly. We observed that applications, such as PowerShell, were able to run freely within an environment, and that there was a high likelihood that one of these tools could be used maliciously without any effective deterrents. None of the EDR, XDR, logging, and forwarding SOX solutions were able to stop such an attack from proceeding.

Application control, ring-fencing, and storage control are the most important features, followed closely by elevation.

More visibility in the built-ins would be nice.

The learning curve is wide because there are a lot of things to learn. 

I have been using ThreatLocker Allowlisting for two years.

ThreatLocker Allowlisting has had minimal downtime, comparable to, if not exceeding, Microsoft's uptime standards.

ThreatLocker Allowlisting is easily scalable. We doubled our endpoint count in three days, and we know that we can scale.

The support team is the best we've had by far. I don't think I've ever waited more than a minute, They usually answer our call in about 30 seconds.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. We pushed ThreatLocker Allowlisting out from our RMM automation system. We have also pushed it out in other ways, and it is always straightforward.

Two of our people were involved in the deployment.

We used ThreatLocker's onboarding process support for the implementation.

The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell.

I would rate ThreatLocker Allowlisting ten out of ten.

The alert board for maintenance requires monitoring.

Potential users should expect to dedicate resources to ThreatLocker Allowlisting. It is not a set-and-forget solution. There is a learning curve, but Cyber Hero support is available to help users through it. Unlike some other products that onboard users and then leave them to the ticketing system, ThreatLocker provides continued support. It is important to note that ThreatLocker Allowlisting cannot be simply turned on and left alone. It requires in-house resources to properly manage at scale.

Our clients require a zero-trust solution for their servers. They need to ensure that nothing happens to the server without authorization — nothing comes in, goes out, or gets corrupted. We put ThreatLocker on the server to block anything that attempts to run without permission. We use ThreatLocker across our whole platform. We continue to pound the table on how great it is and tell our customers that they need it. It is currently deployed for multiple MSP and MSSP clients on their servers and workstations. 

I don't know if ThreatLocker has improved the organization itself, but it has prevented a few clients from doing the dumbest things possible. Our clients are sleeping better at night. I was at dinner with a rep from ThreatLocker when my client accidentally fell for a scam and contacted a fake number for Apple support. She got a message saying that her IP had been stolen. She tried to let them access the system, but ThreatLocker wouldn't allow anything to load. My phone blew up with alerts. 

Meanwhile, my client called, asking me to give "Apple Support" access. I told her to hang up because her IP couldn't be stolen. She was arguing about fake support, and I told her to Google "Stolen IP address scam." She looked it up and realized it was fake, so she hung up with him. She was mad at me for a bit but apologized the next day. If she didn't have ThreatLocker, they would be holding her files for ransom, or she would be leaking data.

It hasn't reduced our help desk tickets so far, and this is something they warn you about. They told us that it was going to be messy in the beginning. They didn't beat around the bush. They said we should expect some dust when we break ground. There will be dust and dirt everywhere, and we'll track it in many places. However, we will clean it up, put some sod down, and make it look beautiful. Until then, the house will be muddy. We expected some pain initially, which is why they do weekly calls with us until we get it to run correctly.

They provide fast access to Cyber Hero support, so they can help you at the drop of a hat. They also put a secure app on your phone to approve things on the fly if the clients are trying to do an update over the weekend. ThreatLocker provides everything you need to get the plane off the ground, and it flies well. Sometimes, clients get annoyed because they can't access something, but I tell them it's a necessary evil. 

I tell them that their network is like flying on a plane. I say, "I know that you want TSA precheck and to be right at the front of the line, but your network doesn't have that. You didn't pay for it with the government." I point out that their security is more important than speed and access. We don't live in a fast-network world anymore. Everything has to be checked and double-checked.

I think it will free up help desk staff after we get past the initial stage, but the clients need to be trained the same way they do with emails. They need to understand that we won't blindly allow anything to work on their network. We will look at it first and ensure everything is how it should be. Finally, we will let it in, but everything will be ring-fenced or limited once it's in. We won't run that program until we figure out how to do that. If my clients are expecting an update, they can't keep that information to themselves. They need to let me know so we can arrange an upgrade time, and I can provide them with a window. We'll run it with some restrictions to ensure they're okay. 

Allowlisting hasn't enabled us to consolidate tools. It's another tool in the toolbox, and everything has its place. After the Colonial Pipeline cyber attack, the president issued an executive order requiring zero trust. ThreatLocker fills that gap. You still have other blind spots, though. We need an email security solution and network monitoring to identify suspicious devices on our network searching for a vulnerability. You can't have ThreatLocker on everything. You can't have it on a printer or a specific firewall, but you can have it on an operating system. There are other blind spots that require attention.

Using ThreatLocker is effortless because I can access it from an app on my phone, so I can help clients after hours. My client had an issue while I was at dinner, and I didn't have a tech on the problem, but I could deal with it from my phone. I can see what the client is doing and approve or deny it. It helps me deliver better service to my clients when they need it.  

ThreatLocker also has a service where one of their techs can call you on Zoom and go through anything denied for the last week. They will train you until you feel comfortable enough to do it yourself. I've dealt with one of their techs from the UK, who was knowledgeable, friendly, and an excellent teacher.

I only needed about six or seven sessions before I didn't need him anymore, but the training didn't stop. They continue to train until you can handle each client request, see what was blocked, and determine why. You can understand why something was blocked and how to dive deeply into it. You can also click "Chat With a Cyber Hero," and somebody will help. It has been a wonderful experience overall. 

We typically use ThreatLocker with ring-fencing when requested. You only ring-fence applications. For example, Microsoft Office doesn't ever need to open PowerShell. It will get flagged automatically if that happens. We know what programs should and should not have access to. The printer should never open an FTP port. Allowlisting automatically sets those policies and says this device has printing functions but can't access an FTP port. 

Allowlisting establishes trust for every access request regardless of origin. In light of new regulations about zero trust, compliance issues, and litigation risks, we must be careful about what gets out and what doesn't get out. Ring-fencing and zero-trust strategies are two ways to do that. We have to run applications, but we don't want them to do anything except what we want. We get the best of both worlds. An application doesn't run if we don't know what it does, and necessary applications will only run with specific rules.

ThreatLocker could offer more flexible training, like online or offline classes after hours. The fact that they even provide weekly training makes it seem silly to suggest, but some people can't do it during the day, so they want to train after work. They could also start a podcast about issues they see frequently and what requires attention. A podcast would be helpful to keep us all apprised about what's going on and/or offline training for those people who can't train during the week.

I have used ThreatLocker since July 2022.

ThreatLocker is highly stable.

ThreatLocker has been very scalable so far. 

I rate ThreatLocker support ten out of ten.  Everyone else should follow their support model. ThreatLocker has a built-in help desk feature. It's one of the best I've seen. An icon in the bottom right corner says "Chat With a Cyber Hero." When I first clicked on it, someone responded in eight seconds. I was like, "Holy cow, that's fast!" They've solved every issue in under five minutes. 

Positive

We rolled out Allowlisting from their portal and then deployed it on servers and critical workstations. It was straightforward and reassuring. We have Kaseya, and we didn't know if we had been affected by the breach. ThreatLocker was there with boots on the ground on a Saturday to help us get secure. They reassured us everything was okay. 

Using ThreatLocker has made us look like real players in the security space. That's a huge deal. You have a seat at the table when you look like a real player. You see value in everything they do. You understand the program and can see what they're pre-populating it with. You can get training from a Cyber Hero almost immediately. 

Most importantly, you can get weekly training to teach you along the way. You can stop and pick it up whenever you need. They are that good. I'm going to have some of my other techs go through the training so everybody can be trained to do a ThreatLocker assessment.

Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does.

Before adopting ThreatLocker, we didn't even know this type of solution existed. We were affected by the Kaseya ransomware attack and forced to shut our server down. We were scared, so we called up ThreatLocker and asked if they could help us. 

They asked to get into our server and see if we were hit. They also looked at the program agent mod to help other people who were impacted. They dropped everything to work with me on a Saturday. Who does that?  

I rate ThreatLocker AllowListing 11.5 out of 10. It's one of the best products on the market, and every MSP needs it because of the zero-trust rules imposed by the executive order. The product does what it says, and the support is fantastic. The training is excellent. They take care of you. You'll know what's happening, and your client will sleep better at night.

In this industry, companies often promise they will help you when you run into trouble. However, they aren't there more often than not. For example, Microsoft tested its software in the beginning and put out a beta version. When they release a new operating system, everyone knows is the beta version, and we're all beta testers. We have to be the ones to tell Microsoft about our issues through the built-in error reporting, and we don't want to report it to Microsoft because we know they won't do anything with it.

We know that they no longer take it seriously. They let us do their work as testers for their beta product. It's refreshing to deal with a product like ThreatLocker where I get support in eight seconds. As soon as I open the chat, they're there typing away. When I start a chat with AT&T, Spectrum, or any of those, I get a message saying, "Support will be with you momentarily." You see the three little dots don't move, and you need to wait five to twenty minutes to get support. ThreatLocker puts out a great product backed up with excellent support and training. What else do you need?