ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Reviews

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is endpoint security and application control, where I monitor and manage application execution, enforce allow-listing policies, and prevent unauthorized software or processes. It helps provide better visibility while I support least privilege access and the zero-trust security model.

When I start a new application or executable that needs to run on an endpoint, I check the application details and its activity in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, verify that the application is trusted and required for our business use, and then apply the appropriate allow-listing policy. If the application is not approved, I cannot restrict its execution and must escalate it for validation.

From my perspective, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is useful for endpoint activity without relying only on traditional antivirus controls. In my day-to-day work, I mainly focus on reviewing application activity, checking policy status, and validating requests for new or updated applications, making it easier to maintain consistent application control and reduce the risk of unauthorized software execution.

The strongest features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform are application allow-listing, policy-based application control, and endpoint visibility. I also find the zero-trust approach useful because it helps ensure applications are explicitly trusted before execution. The centralized management and monitoring make it easier to review activity, manage policies, and respond to unauthorized applications or process execution across endpoints.

Centralized management makes it easier to review endpoint activity and manage application policies from a single console. I can quickly check application events and identify blocked or unauthorized activity or verify whether the request should be allowed. I appreciate the visibility it provides because it reduces the need for troubleshooting each endpoint separately and helps me maintain consistent security policies.

Another feature I find useful is the level of control over application execution, which gives me a clear view of what is running on endpoints and also helps me review application requests before allowing them. I also appreciate the policy-based approach, as it makes security controls more consistent and reduces the chances of unauthorized applications being introduced into the environment.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has helped us improve endpoint security by providing better control and visibility over application execution. The allow-listing and policy-based controls help reduce unauthorized software and limit unnecessary application activity, making application-related security requests easier to review and manage while supporting a more consistent zero-trust and least privilege approach across the environment.

From my perspective, the initial setup and policy configuration of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform could be more intuitive, especially for new users. It can take considerable time to understand the different policies and properly tune them for a large endpoint environment. Better onboarding guidance, clearer policy recommendations, and more streamlined workflows for approving applications would make the overall experience easier and more efficient.

The reporting and dashboard experience could be improved, especially for quickly identifying trends across a large number of endpoints. More flexible reporting options and deeper integrations with SIEM and ITSM platforms would also be beneficial. From a UI perspective, making frequently used policy and application approval workflows more streamlined could allow security and IT teams to save time.

I started using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform once I joined my company, as it was already implemented. My senior colleagues explained how to use it.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has been stable for day-to-day endpoint security and application control activities.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform scales effectively for managing a growing number of endpoints because policies and application controls can be managed centrally. Adding endpoints does not require creating separate security processes for each system, making it easier to maintain consistent policies as the environment grows, although larger deployments naturally require careful policy organization and monitoring.

ThreatLocker customer support has been responsive and helpful whenever I needed assistance. The support team is generally clear when explaining configuration or policy-related issues, which helps resolve problems efficiently. I also find the available documentation useful for understanding features and troubleshooting common issues independently.

There were other endpoint security and application control solutions in the environment before I joined. The main reason for moving toward ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was to gain more control over application execution and a stronger zero-trust approach. I do not have visibility into the exact migration history or which specific product was replaced because I joined six months ago, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was already in place.

The initial setup requires considerable planning, particularly around policy configuration and deployment. The allow-listing feature provides good control over which software, scripts, and libraries can execute on managed endpoints. I find the policy-based approach useful, as applications can be reviewed and approved based on business requirements rather than simply being allowed by default.

The main value from using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has been operational efficiency rather than directly measurable cost savings. The centralized application control and monitoring reduce manual efforts when reviewing security events and handling application requests, helping the team respond faster to unauthorized activity. I do not have exact financial or time-saved metrics, so I cannot provide estimated figures.

The pricing and licensing model for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform seems reasonable for an enterprise endpoint, although the overall costs depend on the number of endpoints and features included. I do not have visibility into the exact contract or pricing negotiated by the organization, so I cannot provide a specific figure.

I was not directly involved in the initial procurement or vendor evaluation, so I do not have visibility into all the solutions that were considered. From a user perspective, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform stood out for its application allow-listing, zero-trust controls, and centralized endpoint management, which are particularly relevant for controlling application execution and enforcing least privilege policy.

The level of control over application execution is a valuable feature that gives me a clear view of what is running on endpoints and also helps me review application requests before allowing them. I appreciate the policy-based approach, as it makes security controls more consistent and reduces the chances of unauthorized applications being introduced into the environment. I would rate this review an eight out of ten.

My main use cases for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are to isolate machines and make it easier to give elevated permissions.

The features I appreciate most about ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are definitely the elevated permissions, so we don't have to give everybody local admin to install things. We have a lot of people in the field that need to install programs, so it's easier to have ThreatLocker do that than constantly give out local admin permissions.

The elevated permission feature benefits my company by allowing us to have many field technicians who are out and could be in the middle of nowhere. Instead of constantly remoting in to help them with installing programs, we can do the initial setup, get everything approved for elevated permissions, and then whoever else needs it from there doesn't have to call us or anything. They can just install it and be fine.

My impression of the allow-listing feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it has been great. It has definitely made our job easier. We do a lot of scripting for automation, and instead of having to go through and run those manually, it allows us to elevate the permissions for that specific script and run it from a remote position and then be fine with it.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is working spectacularly from what I am using it for. I don't have too much input on that because I don't use one hundred percent of the program, unfortunately. From the thirty to forty percent I use, it is running great and doing what is needed. I think it is good now.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for three to six months.

I assess the stability and reliability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as excellent. I have experienced absolutely no downtime, crashes, or performance issues. Everything has been running as intended. We have only had it three to six months, so we might not have hit that point where something might happen. As of right now, there have been no issues at all.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform scales extremely well with the growing needs of my company. We did a small test unit of approximately ten PCs once we started the process of paying for it. We wanted to test deployment and see how that was. Deploying it out was no problem. It was surprising to the end users because they now have a box that randomly pops up when they are trying to run things. The learning aspect is great. We did a full week of learning, and that caught probably ninety-nine percent of the applications that we use and have not had too many issues outside of that. Occasionally, I might have to throw a computer back into learning mode so it relearns some of the newer applications. But other than that, it has been fantastic.

I evaluate the customer service and technical support as fantastic. The Cyber Heroes would probably send somebody on-site if it is something that absolutely needs it. The few issues that we have had, we get a response within ten minutes or so from them, sometimes instantly. That has been fantastic.

Positive

I was not using another solution to address similar needs prior to adopting ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform; ThreatLocker is the first one we have had.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the setup cost was fair. It was definitely a hit to the leadership team, but other than that, it is fair for what it does. There are so many different things inside the application that you can do. I don't know the pricing off the top of my head, but when we set it up, it was very fair for the price. The support has been great with them, and the setup costs were minimal. Pricing-wise, I think it is just good.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs or expenses by freeing up a lot of time on the IT side of the team. Instead of remoting in and manually installing things for people, it released that time from our IT support side to get a little more time on their hands instead of constantly babysitting people to put applications on their computers. Cost-wise, it probably saved us some costs in malicious things that came through that could have potentially been bad. Since it stopped it, we did not have to go down the rabbit hole of getting that fixed.

If I had to give a number, I would estimate that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform saved approximately thirty thousand to forty thousand dollars.

Before selecting ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, I did consider one other solution. I cannot remember the name, but we have seen ThreatLocker at a few other conventions that we have been to, and they are always the headliner on this specific area. We went with them first, liked the price, and went forward with them.

My company has not been able to eliminate or consolidate any security tools or solutions by using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, so it is more of an addition than trying to replace anything else.

I have used the Ringfencing feature of ThreatLocker vaguely, mainly for a few isolated computers, but I have not gone too far into that myself. Our other team member here is the one who mainly does that.

I have not used the Network Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

I do use the Elevation Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

My assessment of its role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications is that it is great. The email notifications or text notifications if somebody needs elevated permissions are especially helpful. It helps instead of people constantly having to figure out how to get a hold of us. They can request it, and then it lets us allow them to run the program.

I don't use the Storage Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

I have not used the DAC dashboard.

I assess the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites as fair. I don't use that one too often, but it does do a fairly good job. There are a few false positives. I would say probably ninety-five percent are legitimate, and the other five percent might be a dead certificate or something along those lines.

I give ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform an overall rating of nine because there is always room for growth and no application is perfect. For other companies, if you have many end users who need things installed or people who are out in the field that need specific applications, it is very beneficial. It saves a lot of time for your team. It is something worth looking into, even if you don't do a full deployment; a scaled deployment to a certain specific audience of your employees would be beneficial.

In addition to protecting my own equipment and my own reputation, I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform with clients. I have some clients that have really high-risk client data that they store on their machines. One client is a fractional data analysis company that does data analytics for probably 15 or 20 different companies, so they have a lot of sensitive data on their machines, and they want that well protected. They do not want their machines to ever be compromised. I am also using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform in conjunction with another group where we are developing and deploying our own VDI product, so it is protecting the VDI product as well.

The most valuable feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is application control, and network control because network control is a key component to how we are protecting the environment in the VDI space. We have one layer of protection at the gateway level, but I prefer a belt and suspenders approach. If your belt fails, the suspenders hold your pants up. I rely on network control even more than the primary control, partially because somebody else is doing the primary control, and I do not trust them. However, I trust what ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can give me at the network control level.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my company might be able to eliminate or consolidate some security tools or solutions. After hearing the latest announcement, I think I could be eliminating some tools and solutions. There are two SaaS platforms that I use to support the Microsoft 365 environment that are probably gone, as well as the gateway solution to the VDI platform. The capabilities from the new feature probably just obsoleted that platform.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by what was just announced. That means giving me the ability to essentially implement my own Zero Trust network environment, much like going to someone like Zscaler, but without the hassle of Zscaler. I love the simplicity of the implementation approach that was outlined and the concept of how it works.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for seven months.

Regarding its scalability and reliability, I have never had an issue with performance. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform did have a brief outage once, but from the standpoint of accessibility and performance, I have never had any issues, and their architecture seems to cover that well.

I assess the customer service and technical support as outstanding.

Positive

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is remarkable. I have no complaints about that; it is very much appropriate, and the pay-as-you-go model that I am operating under as a reseller works well for my size of business.

In terms of the Allowlisting feature, I am fairly new to this and have just gone through certifications. My impression of the Allowlisting feature in managing which software, scripts, and libraries run is that I use it extensively, and it is really impressive because it has the flexibility I need. There is a developer that works with the client that I mentioned that has the high-risk data, and it has been a little challenging, but he and I have been able to work together to develop a strategy where he can deploy the Python scripts that he needs to in a relatively safe fashion without disrupting his work too much. It has the control I need for most people in their organization; I think I have only done three different approvals in the last four months except for this developer. We have developed a framework where I am not disrupting his life either because he is a high-value employee for this company, and I need to protect the data while letting him do the work he needs to do, so it gives me the flexibility to accomplish that.

I have used the Ringfencing feature. Assessing the impact of the Ringfencing feature on controlling the behavior of approved applications, the fact that I can restrict someone from using Dropbox, for instance, and prevent them from accessing other data related to OneDrive on a machine is actually substantial. I can do a good job of preventing data exfiltration from machines with that and some storage control features, among other things.

I use the Network Control feature. The Network Control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers by enabling fine-grain control, particularly with the VDI solution I mentioned. It gives me the ability to control where RDP sessions can originate; I only want to receive them through a gateway called Kasm. It also allows me to establish who can have direct connections to it in a support role. Previously, I had limited choices for how admins could connect to the Kasm service, and I did not like the options available for multi-factor authentication on there, but now I can use Network Control with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform on the Linux server to enable only machines with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform installed to connect to it.

I have not used the Elevation feature yet. I have used the Storage Control feature. My thoughts on the Storage Control feature in enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices are that while I am not deeply mature with using it, the instances in which I have used it, I love the concepts, and I came out of an environment where my last job was data security manager for a large enterprise. I wish I had had it there.

I have used the DAC dashboard. Identifying which security and configuration settings need attention is straightforward. That is because ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform not only gives you the controls that you do not have configured properly but also the solution on how to fix it.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as a 10, and companies that are considering it need to stop considering and just implement it.

My main use cases for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are Application Whitelisting, Elevation Control, and Storage Control.

The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I find most valuable are the application control and Elevation Control.

My impression of the solution's allow-listing feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is positive. We can implement it at a global level or a user device level, and it is straightforward to execute. By placing it in learning mode, the system does most of the work automatically, and we only need to address occasional edge cases as they arise.

The role of Elevation in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications is critical for us. Our industry software is twenty years old, and everything needs to run as local admin. We obviously cannot do that from a security perspective, so having only this application run as admin is essential for us to keep the devices secure.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my company has been able to eliminate or consolidate three solutions: BeyondTrust, USB Lock, and Active Directory Software Restriction Policy for Application Whitelisting.

The benefits of using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for my company include removing previous tools that we did not prefer, replacing them with this solution, and enjoying a significantly better user experience. It should reduce some overhead and save time in processes that are now faster.

To improve ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, I would prefer grouping done in the console rather than in how you deploy the software, so that we can automate that more effectively. Additionally, more integrations with our specific tools, such as Arctic Wolf, which is our SOC, would be beneficial so that it can feed security logs out of ThreatLocker into that system.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for nine months.

Regarding the stability and reliability of the platform, I have experienced no downtime, crashes, or performance issues. It works reliably and performs as quickly as expected.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform scales effectively with the growing needs of my company, with expanded usage being primarily about the learning mode, which makes it straightforward to roll out.

I have not yet engaged with customer service or technical support. We are currently working with our Solutions Engineer, who is available when we need assistance.

Negative

The factors that led me to consider a change when switching from three different tools to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform included usability more than anything else. The previous tools were all very manual and intensive, representing basically a full-time job for one person. Now that everything is in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, we have that single pane of glass again where we can do all things in the same console, much more granularly, allowing us to apply controls to just specific devices or whitelist Office for the whole business, which is something we had struggled with.

I eliminated those tools because we wanted that single pane of glass, so everything was done in one console with full visibility. We now have an audit in the unified audit that shows what is happening, which we have never previously had.

I would say ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs or tasks because long-term it will provide savings once we are fully up and running. It should help reduce our team's overhead of approving applications, allowing us to delegate it to other departments or automate the process.

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is expensive, but it is what you would expect because it is a comprehensive platform. Obviously, there is some savings there, but overall, the cost has increased, although there are some optimization savings that the business will probably realize long-term that will help offset the investment.

I did not consider any other tools or solutions before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. The previous tools we used were ones we switched to initially and then decided we did not prefer, so we were switching again. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does everything we need it to do, making it an easy choice.

I believe the long-term impact that Ringfencing has on controlling the behavior of approved applications will be beneficial for us because currently, everything is very open. We can start limiting applications so that they can only communicate with the services they need to access, rather than having the ability to reach everywhere and do whatever it wants. Currently, this represents a significant attack surface for us.

I have not used the Storage Control feature much. I have not used the Ringfencing feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, but we have seen it somewhat. I have not really engaged with the Network Control feature yet, but it is more of a phase two for us, focusing on Application, Elevation, and the other features as a first step.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform overall as a nine out of ten because I do not give anything a perfect ten, which effectively means it is a ten. My advice to other companies considering it is to proceed with a proof of concept. The POC took less than an hour to complete, we had it running at the site, and the site did not even notice the implementation. It is not difficult to enable, and I recommend seeing what happens and discovering what it can do for your organization. I would rate this solution nine out of ten overall.

My main use cases for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are to prevent applications from running that we do not want to run and to keep our endpoints safe and secure. We have had a breach in the past and so we are really focused on security now. Luckily, that happened before I started. The primary goal is to prevent applications that are not meant to run.

Examples of how those features benefit my company include that we are a small manufacturing company and our engineers have a tendency to think they should have admin rights and be able to download anything they want. Being able to protect the company from this mindset is handy. Being able to prevent them from installing whatever they think they want is beneficial.

The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most include being able to get alerts from end users when they want to install something. When they are trying to install something and it gets denied, they can click the request this application button. Then we get alerts and we can review it. The sandbox testing is also really nice.

My impression of the solution's allow listing feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that I really like it because you can set those programs and libraries to an elevated mode. When an end user needs to install the software, IT does not have to get involved. It has already been approved and elevated, so they do not need to call us for administrative credentials to install it.

I do not think I would add or change anything at this time. The only thing that comes to mind would be when I am working on an endpoint trying to install software and I need to move it to application learning mode or maintenance mode. I have to go back to my desktop to do that. It would be nice if I could right-click from the system tray and enter my credentials to enter into application learning mode directly there.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for about eight months.

My assessment of the stability and reliability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is that it has been up 100% of the time and running well.

I would evaluate the customer service and technical support as excellent because I have not had to use them.

Positive

Before adopting ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, I was not using anything for application control. I have never seen anything similar to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform in the past.

From one to ten, I would rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten just because the initial setup was a little confusing. Even though we had an MSP do it for us, we were following along, and it was a little confusing.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs and expenses. As I mentioned earlier, the elevated prompt and the allow listing mean we do not have to go around to each user to enter credentials to install software. We just tell them where the software package is and they can install it themselves.

My experience with the pricing, the setup cost, and the licensing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has been fantastic.

My company has not been able to eliminate or consolidate any security tools or solutions. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is actually a result of that process. When we moved to an MSP, they consolidated a bunch of our software and tools, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform was one of the add-ons, which was nice.

I do not use the Network Control feature, to my knowledge. I do use the Elevation Control feature. My assessment of its role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications is that I think it is great. As I said earlier, you do not have to be bothered by the end user to come install a program that is on the allow list. It is elevated, so it allows the end user to install it without IT getting involved, and that saves us time, which is valuable. I do not think we use the Storage Control feature. I do not remember the setup process for that. I think we do use the DAC dashboard, and I think that would be part of the pending approvals section in that dashboard where users ask for approval for software, and we have to go and approve it, use the sandbox and all of that, and either approve or deny it. The ease of identifying which security and configurations settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard is something we have not gotten into because our MSP set it all up and handled all of that for us, which was nice. I have not used the Web Control feature.

We do use the Ring Fencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, but I am not 100% certain on how we do it or how we use it because I know the MSP helped us set that up, but I know we do use it.

I would rate this review a nine out of ten overall.

Our main use cases for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are for all of our MSP clients; we use the total package. Every one of our clients gets ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. We do not have any opt-out or anything of that nature.

I would say I value Application Control the most about ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

We operate from a default deny on our firewalls, so why wouldn't we do the same thing within our actual applications? Plus we have Shadow IT we have to worry about and of course, threat actors.

It benefits us by allowing me to sleep at night and having a true inventory of the applications that are in place. I think a lot of other security products overlook that inventory of applications to find out what is actually running in an environment and then being able to control who runs those applications.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, we have been able to eliminate some security tools; we did have SentinelOne, and while it is a good product, it was not doing anything because ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform was preemptively taking action.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform could be improved by addressing the human identity piece, whether through ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform or another tool. Currently, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does not have the human identity, and I would love to see them release something similar to that. Think MGM; everybody knows that a call center password reset was social engineered. A simple end-user verification would have stopped that whole attack, and I would like to see ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform develop something of that nature.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform since 2021, which is five years.

I would assess the stability and reliability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as being on par or exceeding most uptime; we have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform scales well with the growing needs of my company; I would say we have had 300% growth since the implementation of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, and it scaled with no problem. It has actually gotten easier because we are becoming more proficient in the tool.

I evaluate the customer service and technical support as being second to none.

Positive

We were using SentinelOne.

The factors that led me to consider a change from SentinelOne included the performance; SentinelOne was a good tool, but we just did not see it performing any duties because ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform was on the proactive side, and SentinelOne was not taking any actions.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs by allowing us to remove some tools that had overlaps, which obviously leads to overall savings; I cannot tell you the exact amount though.

My experience with the pricing, the setup cost, and the licensing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is that we have very good pricing. I think if you take the sum of the tools, they are very competitive, if not more affordable than most solutions out there.

Before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, we actually shopped around; there was no other solution out there that did what ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform did. It was an obvious choice. We did pair that with SentinelOne initially, but then when ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform became a full EDR/MDR solution, which honestly was performing those functions before they even branded it that way, we were able to let go of SentinelOne.

The impact of the Ringfencing feature on controlling the behavior of approved applications is significant. You can take something that is not malicious, such as 7-Zip, which is used by a lot of users, but because it is maintained by Russia, you would not want to allow that call-out over the internet calling back home; you can Ringfence that internet connection entirely. Other tools of that nature can be used for encryption, and we do not want a non-malicious tool used for malicious purposes. Another good example is PowerShell; since PowerShell is built into every Windows computer, you have to let PowerShell do its job but nothing else.

The Network Control feature makes it much easier to manage network traffic across endpoints and servers because you do it without running VLANs and in some cases, rewiring a building. You can actually segment that network based on use need and the risk of that particular vertical.

My assessment of the Elevation Control feature in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is that just-in-time elevation allows us to give the applications or the user that limited administrative privilege without posing a long-term threat.

My thoughts on the Storage Control feature when enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices are that we can actually enforce control that HIPAA mandates with basically two policies. A lot of the HIPAA environments we walk into say they are doing it, but they are not. We can set that with two policies within Storage Control. We can also use Storage Control to do some data loss prevention, mandate encryption on removable storage, and we can even get a little bit more granular and alert based on activity around the particular storage area.

Identifying which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard is made much easier because we can go at the client's board level and see if there are any improper configurations or adjustments that could make a broader control overall.

The efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites can be very valuable, especially in a newly registered domain. A lot of phishing emails are linked to newly registered domains, so that is going to flag and block that potential phishing attempt or social engineering that leads inevitably to credential harvesting.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a 10 out of 10. Overall, I rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a 10, and I would advise other companies considering the solution that they should have done it yesterday. Most of my time here is talking to other MSPs about why they are not doing this yet, but it is a phenomenal solution. On the recovery side, we work active recoveries for people that are not our clients, and we have yet to see ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform in place in any of those environments. I think that attests to how strong the solution is.

I would say the leadership at ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, from the C-suite all the way down to the Tier 1 cyber hero, is remarkable; they create a sense of family and partnership that really resonates with using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform serves as our main solution for endpoint security purposes, where we control applications, scripts, users, and devices, determining what needs to run and what needs to be blocked.

In my environment, not all users have admin rights, so we allow some applications to be executed by standard users without local admin access, using it for security purposes to run only a specific set of applications and blocking unverified PowerShell scripts.

Another example regarding storage control involves blocking USB storage through this tool.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted our organization by reducing security incidents. Even while we restrict secure data access, it monitors and audits, allowing us to generate reports in parallel.

After implementing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, my organization has seen a reduction in security incidents by almost 75%.

Ring Fencing is the best feature in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform because it restricts only approved applications from accessing sensitive data, preventing unapproved applications from running altogether and limiting access even for allowed applications to sensitive files or folders, making it more secure.

In our environment, we have particular sensitive details in finance and sales departments, and Ring Fencing helps us restrict access to those files through applications, ensuring that not all applications can access sensitive files and folders.

With the AI integration in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, we can fetch reports by providing prompts without needing to navigate the GUI, delivering exactly what we need in response to our queries. The AI output has met my expectations by providing more accurate data.

The allow listing feature offers more additional attributes such as AI integration, Ring Fencing, network control, monitoring, and auditing, which are more advanced compared to CyberArk EPM, and we were very impressed with these features in this tool.

We actively use the Ring Fencing feature, which significantly impacts our ability to control the behavior of approved applications by blocking access to sensitive files and folders.

Through the network control feature, we allow certain applications to communicate over the network, which enhances our control.

We are using Elevation Control in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to facilitate just-in-time administrative access for approved applications, allowing standard users to run specific applications with elevated privileges without needing admin rights.

Previously, we blocked USB and other storage devices through policy and GPO, but since moving to Intune and utilizing this tool, we appreciate managing all security features within this single tool instead of using multiple security solutions.

It is very easy to identify which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard, as it has a user-friendly GUI.

I assess the efficiency of real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control as very accurate in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform currently meets our expectations fully, so I do not have any specific suggestions for improvement.

I do not have any specific ideas at this time, but I suggest that if possible, it could be improved to enable taking immediate remediation actions, which could also be integrated into this tool.

We have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for the last two years.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

I rate its scalability a 10.

We receive customer support very frequently, with immediate responses available 24/7.

I would rate customer support a 10.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, we replaced CyberArk EPM because it provided more features.

Previously, we used CyberArk EPM, but we switched to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform because it offers more additional features.

I cannot provide specific metrics related to operational cost savings.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has reduced man-effort, and we no longer need to invest as much time on security-related issues, achieving a 75% reduction in security-related incidents.

We purchased ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform through the AWS Marketplace.

I find it cost-worthy, but I do not have exact details on pricing, setup costs, and licensing; only the finance team can confirm that.

I did not evaluate any other options before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

I rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a 10.

I give it a 10 because it provides additional features beyond our expectations and significantly reduces our manpower needs in security-related activities.

My advice for others considering using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it is cost-worthy, has additional features worth exploring, and significantly reduces manpower effort. My overall review rating for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 10.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is allow listing software, as well as Elevation Control and Storage Control.

For a specific example of how I use allow listing or Elevation Control in my day-to-day work, I set a list of what software is allowed on our network computers and any software that is not those programs is simply not allowed to run. ThreatLocker makes that really easy to deploy.

The allow listing feature stands out to me as being especially reliable and helpful. We run the executable on people's computers, it gets them into the system, and then there's a really clean UI where we can go and see what is allowed or not allowed. It's clear and easy for people that have both industry experience and lack industry experience to use.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization by making us much more secure in the sense that people aren't able to just install any random software that they want anymore. It has cut down massively on Shadow IT, which is people going and installing programs without consulting the IT department first. The Elevation Control has been very useful for any remote employees when they try to go and run any software updates. We are able to elevate the permissions on those software in case they are running into any issues while across the world.

I would like to see ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform improve by developing some sort of software deployment plan where we can use it for pushing out and installing software onto the computers through the remote agents. For example, if I wanted to go and install Adobe Acrobat onto every computer in the company, it would be really nice if I could go and do that through ThreatLocker by just pushing out the software to each person. We can already go and allow the software on each one of the machines and elevate the permissions so that I can actually install them, but being able to deploy out software or even being able to remote uninstall software from all the machines would be very useful as well.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform since December of last year, so about ten months.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's scalability is good; it's worked on a couple computers all the way up to every single one of the computers and servers in the company, and we've had no problems anywhere from the small number to the large number.

Customer support is excellent.

The support team behind the product has been extremely helpful. We set up meetings where we go and meet every couple weeks or every month just to check in and make sure everything is going well. It's been a very nice white glove service and I've never felt lost trying to navigate the product due to the additional help that they have provided.

We've seen an uptick in tickets since we've implemented ThreatLocker due to the allow listing not being implemented in our system beforehand, but the tickets are very easy to handle. It's really smooth, as well as it's hard to quantify a system being more secure via metrics, but the system is more secure now.

The biggest return on investment that I've seen is that there has been less security incidents at which people have installed nefarious software onto their machines. It's hard to go and prove that we've had less security incidents since this because they got stopped before they turned into a security incident. We've also seen a lot of increase of ease of use in the sense of people using the Elevation Control remotely, trying to go and run software updates or download various software from all across the continental United States.

Regarding my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing, I remember reaching out to them and it was about over a month. I reached out to them directly and also a couple third-party service providers in my area to see if we could get any better pricing through them, and our best pricing was actually directly through ThreatLocker themselves. It wasn't bad; the other ones I went and tried to look through wanted us to pay a lot more than going directly through ThreatLocker. Their attendant support and everything was really nice, and we haven't had any problems with it so far.

I evaluated other options before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

There were a couple of other solutions that I considered before deciding on ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, but the names escape me. ThreatLocker was given to me from glowing reviews from multiple of my IT friends, so I had bumped them up my list of folks I was going to look into quickly. It kind of stopped at them first and I never bothered looking at others.

I'm not the biggest fan of AI, so I will say that I have not used ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI governance and security systems very much.

I largely try not to use any of its AI features because I don't support AI use, especially in tech. The DAC that it has set up is decent, but it still has its issues. I don't really use it that much. It's kind of an interesting feature, but I don't really use it.

We deploy ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform out to everybody via installed agents on each one of their computers, but all the data is on their cloud.

My impression of the solution's allow listing feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it's a little finicky when dealing with software that is proprietary and is updated regularly. However, with any large software that's commercially available, it works flawlessly and we haven't had any issues with any of those.

I have used the Ringfencing feature with ThreatLocker; however, I haven't utilized it to the best of its abilities yet. It kind of acts as a pseudo, I'm going to allow this but not really. I don't see it as super useful unless I'm dealing with some sort of software that I'm on the fence about even allowing in the first place.

We do not have the Network Control module currently.

The DAC dashboard leaves something to be desired. It gives a decent starting point to where I need to go with some security configuration settings, but I don't use it as a one-stop shop.

My advice for others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to reach out to them, and they will get you set up with a free trial and use the software and the dashboard. Take a look at it yourself. There's an app that you can get on your phone. The ease of use cannot be understated and the support that their customer service provides is unparalleled in the industry.

I think ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is really good. They're constantly running updates and they're very aware of what their customer base wants and needs. They do a decent amount of outreach and help for the community in the sense of sending out cybersecurity training videos and webinars, as well as putting on the Zero Trust World.

My overall review rating for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is ten out of ten.

I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for application control, network control, storage, ringfencing, policy, deployments, and cloud security.

The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I appreciate the most are Application Control and ThreatLocker Detect. Application Control locks things down and isolates the machines very well. For ThreatLocker Detect, if a user gets compromised and their email is exposed through a login from overseas in Europe, that would have gotten blocked by default, and then we would be alerted. That is why I value that feature significantly.

These features benefit our company primarily because of our scale. We do not have as many technicians under an MSP compared to how many clients we have. We handle well over 1,500 users at any given time.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by exploring ways of ensuring it is deployed deeper in the device rather than through an extension on the browser and finding ways to integrate all browsers.

My company has been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for quite a long time, since ThreatLocker was just in application mode. I have been using it since working at our company.

I assess the stability and reliability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as very good. With the agents, there have been a couple of versions that have had some minor issues with blue screens that have been fixed. Every so often, the portal might go down, but it is down for a very small amount of time. Otherwise, it has been a very smooth and seamless experience with probably 99.5% uptime.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform scales well with the growing needs of our company. Last year, from 24 to 25, we scaled over 1,000 endpoints through a ramp process, and the process was smooth. We were able to audit devices, ensure devices were not being billed that were inactive, and identify new devices that we were missing. It was very seamless and on ThreatLocker's side, the billing, accountability, and device tracking was easy to do.

Regarding customer service and technical support, I would evaluate ThreatLocker's side as very efficient and fast. They are able to get an answer through their ticketing system, their call center, or their help desk. I would say they are efficient and they know how to resolve problems usually.

Positive

Prior to adopting ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, we used Sophos as an antivirus and we used Huntress as the EDR solution. ThreatLocker replaced both of those items.

We replaced Huntress because it does endpoint detection and will identify if there is any ransomware or risk on a device. ThreatLocker does the exact same thing with ThreatLocker Detect. We found that we did not need to pay for two of the same products when we could have an all-in-one solution using ThreatLocker.

We replaced Sophos because it is just an antivirus, similar to Windows Defender, McAfee, and other applications. We noticed that because ThreatLocker integrates with Windows Defender or Windows Security, Sophos was too high of a cost for us, whereas ThreatLocker offered some of what Sophos does offer at a much more affordable option.

I would say ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs or expenses. I am more on the technical side of things, so I cannot really speak to operational costs, but with the MDR team at ThreatLocker, it does help us prevent having to have a 24/7 technician because the MDR team handles that for us.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is that we are a very legacy customer, so pricing is extremely cheap and affordable. Setup has been very seamless. We can make an organization instantly and set up as many devices as we need. It has very easy scalability.

I have used the Ringfencing feature with ThreatLocker, and I would say the behavior it can control is very broad and restrictive because it blocks internet access and can block PowerShell and command prompts. It does a very good job if you want to isolate a program from accessing anything else. It is helpful.

The Network Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers in a way that is not frequently utilized because we use isolated networks and firewalls already. We have not had the need to use Network Control apart from disabling the ability for RDP.

I use the Elevation Control feature in ThreatLocker with specific privileges. Elevation Control is very good when it comes to letting a standard user launch something as an admin for a temporary period of time, provided we allow it. My assessment of the Elevation Control feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications is that it works well provided we have the staff available to take that request. Because it does restrict users from being able to access their work if they need to launch something with administrative privileges, it could use some more automation.

My thoughts on the Storage Control feature when it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices are definitely excellent with restricting USB access or remote hard drive access. Being able to monitor and ensure with Storage Control that data exfiltration is prevented has been a very useful feature.

The DAC dashboard is something that seems still relatively new and not too purposeful for what we currently do as an MSP in terms of identifying which security and configuration settings need fixing.

I assess the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites as very effective. Those work very well. However, it does not work in Firefox. It only works in Chrome and Edge. It also needs to be able to throw an extension onto a browser, so it is not a surefire way of blocking websites.

My impression of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's Allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on our devices is very good. ThreatLocker has many built-in policies or default denies that help us with scalability for devices, and being able to isolate them per device and per organization is very helpful simply because we work with many different clientele in accounting, medical, construction, and other industries. It is very helpful when it comes to isolating and grouping organizations with application control.

My advice for other companies that are considering ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is to try it out and demo it. It is really easy to install and very difficult to remove, so you should make sure you know how to remove it before demoing the product. I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a nine on a scale of one to ten.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is blocking applications, as it defaults to blocking all kinds of applications, and whenever we are required to allow any kind of application, we can edit the policies and allow it from there. It is an amazing platform and an amazing endpoint security tool apart from other kinds of antivirus tools.

I have used ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform multiple times to allow applications such as Startel and other voice applications, as well as Microsoft applications. By default, it denies all kinds of applications, but whenever we require them, we use it to allow the applications as per the requirement of the organization.

With ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, whenever any applications get upgraded or updated, it defaults to that application as well, so we have to predefine, create a hash tag value, and add the hash tag policy to ensure it does not block any authenticated apps such as Startel and Amtelco vendors. One time, I used that and they had updated their version, and it got blocked. We applied the hash signature and afterward, it does not block anything related to that application. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is good software and a zero-trusting application, with excellent Cyber Hero support that can respond within 60 seconds whenever we get stuck on any policies in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform positively impacts my organization by emphasizing the need for someone working on it to know each and every policy and feature, as not being an expert can lead to multiple alerts whenever any user launches an application, considering it denies all kinds of applications by default. It requires good hands-on practice for engineers to work on it, which is what I know about ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is very helpful in reducing security incidents as it sometimes blocks malware and ransomware. Users often do not know the impact of the applications they want to run on their PCs, and that is why we use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, which by default blocks all kinds of applications. Whenever a user requests an application, we have to identify it, verify if it is genuine, and then deploy the policy for that application before they can use it on their machines. It is definitely a good product.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, we primarily use it for application management purposes, while we also utilize other security tools such as EDR, XDR, and antivirus applications. It is beneficial because it blocks all kinds of applications by default. We apply our own policies, and we can eliminate unnecessary applications, but we have not eliminated any antivirus applications since we already use Webroot. We specifically use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for allowing and denying applications.

The best features that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers are its ringfencing technology and the support, as they are really available for quick assistance, which I appreciate.

The ringfencing feature helps me in my day-to-day work by ensuring that if we allow Microsoft Word, it does not let this application interact with any kind of other application, providing security to all kinds of endpoint devices. When we require a particular user to allow an application such as Microsoft Excel, Word, or any .exe application he wants to run, we can easily use ringfencing, which secures our applications. I have used the ringfencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, and I can confirm its positive impact on controlling the behavior of approved applications.

For managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on our devices, we sometimes use an AD script for user creation, and if PowerShell is not whitelisted, it will get blocked. Therefore, we have already allowed PowerShell, allowing us to use the scripts effectively.

The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers according to our rules.

With the policy-driven storage control feature, we block USBs and can create a storage control policy that allows or denies outsourced devices.

From when I started using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform until now, I find it a very interesting and sophisticated tool, and I can rate it 9 out of 10.

Sometimes, there are dependencies on the applications when they upgrade their patches, where the older version is already allowed, but when the newer version comes, DLL files and other components get blocked. I think we need to set a hierarchy policy to prevent blocking, as this can frustrate new users or technicians when they try to add policies repeatedly. However, overall, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is completely good and is the best secure product on the market.

I have around eight years of experience using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable based on my experience.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is a good product in terms of scalability.

Customer support for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is absolutely very good, as they are easily available within 60 seconds. I would rate customer support a 9 on a scale of 1 to 10.

I did not use a different solution before ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

I have not seen a return on investment in terms of money saved, time saved, or fewer employees needed, as I am working in an MSP company and recommend ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to all kinds of companies. It is a good and genuine application.

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is good, as I worked with my senior for all cost-related aspects, and it is a good overall product.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

The governance and security of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities are manageable according to the policies and features, as we also need to upgrade their patches whenever new versions are available, allowing easy replication of policies across all servers, old servers, and desktops.

The accuracy of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is good, as the AI features provide really helpful output to resolve issues, and I can trust this platform.

I can recommend others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to experience it, as it is an overall amazing product. I am giving ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a rating of 9 out of 10 because I have a good experience with it. It is very useful for blocking malware and ransomware, and it defaults to blocking all kinds of applications. Whenever we need any applications, we can add policies and allow them, making these features very good.