ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Reviews

We have been using the solution for about five years now. We started shortly after our company was acquired by an ISP that was looking for a managed services provider solution. I was looking at our stack and deciding which one would answer the pressing questions, which usually involved cyber insurance questions, such as if we have application whitelisting. I happened to call ThreatLocker and fell in love with the offerings. At the time, it had application control, ringfencing, and elevation. They have, of course, advanced their platform a lot since then.

The biggest benefit is application whitelisting. We have customers who have a set of products that they expect their users to use, and we have the ability to enforce that policy by restricting them from adding additional software on their own. It helps reduce the risk of the shadow IT type of solutions being brought in by users who think they know better or do not realize the risks.

In the beginning, it was almost an augmentation to antivirus, but now, antivirus is almost an augmentation to Zero Trust. If the applications do not run, the antivirus does not have to block them, so the antivirus is almost the second layer. With the layered protection approach, it is one of our key layers at the endpoint to keep the endpoint from running ransomware or unknown software packages.

A number of times, we have had customers who did not see the need for it until the first time we called them and said, "Hey, did you realize so-and-so wants to run this application?" and they went, "Why would they be doing that?" The ability for us to let the end-users or customers know the things going on in their environment and to stop attacks dead in their tracks has been great. We have seen it multiple times where a bad actor would have gotten a whole lot further along if they had been able to run the software they wanted to. ThreatLocker stopped that.

It is not hard to use, but it also depends on the customer base that you are working with. It can be a challenge to educate the end user and the customer with regard to why this is the right answer. A lot of times, if you have customers who have older applications, custom-written applications, and things like that, dealing with updates and dealing with changes can be time-consuming. It is not hard. None of it is particularly difficult, but it can be a bit of a draw on time.

We have been able to do consolidation primarily in the antivirus realm. Because of the fact that the applications are never allowed to run, we have been able to reduce some of our costs by not having to go to top-line AVs. We can go to Windows Defender, which is a good antivirus, but it is not centrally-managed SentinelOne or something like that. We have been able to see some big advantages in cutting back. Some of the other tools do not have to carry the heavy load. ThreatLocker carries a heavier load of protection.

I do not know if it has helped our organization save on operational costs or expenses. It has to be manned by people. We are not using the functionality where ThreatLocker Cyber Heroes respond to the tickets. Instead of hiring two people, if we let ThreatLocker manage that, we would see some definite advantages cost-wise.

It is priceless in its ability to block access to unauthorized applications. We have had everything from attacks on financial institutions to shutdown holds where the attacker was about to exfiltrate four years of data, but the PowerShell script was still sitting on the screen, unable to run because ThreatLocker blocked it. It is well worth it.

It has helped reduce help desk tickets because we get a lot fewer situations where end users are running software that they should not be and are causing conflicts with the business protection software. There are a lot fewer situations where someone is compromising the machine.

We run on a very lean team, and we have been able to maintain that status reasonably well because, with ThreatLocker, we do not have to chase things that cannot happen.

All the features are very useful. The biggest one that we focus on is the application control with ringfencing. That combination is very beneficial. We have had some recent benefits. Especially with the elevation functionality, we could remove the local admin requirement for applications that constantly required us to make users local admins on their machines. We take that risk away with elevation control, where we can elevate applications that need elevation instead of all of them. 

Their product is solid. I have a hard time complaining much about it because when we do find little things, they are usually interface-related or related to things that would be nice to have. Their idea portal, unlike so many other vendors we deal with, shows movement. At least four to eight features of ThreatLocker exist because I made a request in the last five years, and it became a feature of the actual product. When it comes to improvements, we moved the product as customers, and we got to move the product by making suggestions. They seem to be very reactive to it, so there is not a whole lot that they actively need to change right now. It is one of those situations where when we run into something that would be nice to have, it happens. They make it work.

We have used the solution for about five years.

The product is highly stable. Obviously, as they add features, every once in a while, there is something that catches us off guard, and we will have to get support. They have the answers right then and there. As a result, it has never been something that has brought us down. We have never had a customer who is down because ThreatLocker is not working. By the nature of what it does, it could be a big problem for a customer, but we have never had it. It has been stable. For five years, we have not had a problem. Customers cannot do what they want to be able to do within reason, and we have never had ThreatLocker be the cause of that.

The solution is very scalable. We started with just our office, and now we have over 3,000 endpoints on it. It scales up very easily. Once again, cloud deployment of the agents and everything else makes it very easy to add new computers to it. It is literally a matter of buying licenses, and it does not seem to care how big our environment is for the most part. The product just handles it.

Their support is world-class. You cannot beat ThreatLocker support. I started a request at eleven at night, and someone started to chat within 30 seconds to a minute. They can easily go to Zoom for conferences and have conversations. Their answers are usually immediate, and if not, it is because they have to go to the engineering team for answers or solutions. If it is an actual feature problem or something like that, it is very fast. We have said more than once that if all of our vendors would act and support us like ThreatLocker does, we would be happy. It would be a perfect world. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

This is the first time we have done application whitelisting. We brought it in about five years ago looking for an application whitelisting solution, so it was the start of our experience.

We use our own RMM solution for deployment. The setup was definitely easy. Tech support provided us with the scripts and resources needed to push it. It is all pushed from PowerShell scripts, and that downloads straight from ThreatLocker, so we do not have to ever be on-site to do anything. When we are offboarding customers, it is just as easy. We can turn off the self-defense in ThreatLocker and run scripts to uninstall it. Generally, there is no on-premises requirement for it. From an MSP standpoint, it is truly cloud-managed.

We contacted ThreatLocker directly.

From the reputation capability or the ability to show customers that we are doing what we say we do, the return on investment is immense. We also have customers who are frustrated because they cannot do what they used to do, which was run anything they wanted to. However, the first time we save them from something that would have been really bad had we not been there, that instantly changes.

We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs. We have to be able to price them into our contracts. That has probably been our biggest challenge. Once we are in with a customer for one to three years on a contract, bringing in those new features at an additional cost is a challenge. 

We are moving towards the Unified solution, where they basically bundle everything together, providing us better stability with the ability to bring in new product offerings without having to go back to the customer and say, "This is going to cost you."

We looked at a few others. A customer we had many years ago had brought a solution that I helped them with to some degree. I do not remember the name of it, as it was fifteen years ago. It was one of the early ones and was a management nightmare. The amount of effort and work it took to make it work and keep it working was a lot. Compared to that, ThreatLocker is amazing.

Overall, I would rate it a solid nine out of ten. It is a complex solution if you are like me and do not necessarily want to call for help frequently. They have help available all the time and will walk you through the process of setting it up if you are trying to figure it out on your own. That is not going away, in my opinion. It is not really a bash against it; it is just a fact about ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

We use it as an endpoint protection solution. It pretty much sits on all of our devices. We manage the app control piece through it. 

We use it for elevation requests. Worldwide, we have set Zero Trust, so people need to elevate through applications. We do not want to give them an admin account on the machine, but we need these applications to run with administrator privileges. That is the piece we leverage the most.

The greatest benefit is the ease. The mobile app is great. I get requests in the portal, and I can allow or reject them, and it works almost instantly, getting teams up and running within 60 seconds. That is the best part. We can train global teams in a half-hour meeting. We are able to break down all their permissions. It is done in a few seconds. We are happy with it.

Elevation control has been second to none for us. It has been amazing. We switched off the last product we were using. We did not have a great experience with them, but we have had a great experience with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

We have eliminated our original endpoint app. We will look into consolidating some of the other tools that our Information Security team uses, but at the moment, it is a replacement; it has not cut any other apps out of our environment. We have already started exploring different ways to eliminate or at least add to our security posture. Specifically, we are targeting the storage control and deeper application control with ringfencing and things like that. We have had lots of demos from ThreatLocker. They are always very good about giving demos on the spot. Thanks to Blaine and Jesse for that.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is fantastic at blocking access to unauthorized applications. With our old product, we had so many issues with policies being all over the place. It was not very intuitive, and the product could not even update itself. ThreatLocker has broken it down in terms of how exactly it is run and the science behind it all. That education and their knowledge base have helped us with understanding. It has been a fantastic platform. It has been in our environment for a relatively short period of time. It has been fantastic so far, and I am hoping that it continues to prove itself.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has not helped to reduce help desk tickets, but it has streamlined them. Instead of guessing what the user needs, the elevation requests pretty much tell you the properties or the paths of what needs to run. That may introduce more tickets, but it is so much faster that it outweighs that aspect.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has expedited our ticket resolution. Although we are getting more tickets, we are plowing through a lot faster. We can see them in the console. People no longer have to reach out to us. People can create an elevation request for the entire organization. They could go to the console and see it there and do it themselves. It makes things so much easier. It has been awesome.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform allows us to see what the user needs immediately and simply hit the Go or Approve button. We can set the rules we want. Our last solution was trial and error. It would take me up to an hour and a half sometimes to get the rules working exactly the way I wanted, whereas, with ThreatLocker, it is already all there for me. I can even break down and specify exactly what I want or drill down even more. 

In a day, it saves us one to two hours a day depending on what is being elevated and what people need. This time saving is significant for our technicians. The overall savings could be two to three days. We get overtime, but that is still a lot of work. ThreatLocker has been amazing at saving us time. 

We use it most heavily for elevation control, blocking and giving rights only to certain people or devices, and not allowing the rest to access the software. Elevation control has been second to none for me.

It is super easy to use. We could train a team in 30 minutes. If you are in it relatively often, it becomes second nature. The reduction in attack surfaces comes down to the elevation approval. If an app cannot be elevated or run as an administrator, it is not running at all. That is the key part there. It helps ensure that people are not running something that they are not supposed to. It is very trustworthy. It was socialized pretty quickly within our company. It was very quick.

ThreatLocker’s support has been second to none.

Better visualizations of what exactly is happening in our logs would be helpful. There can be more visuals on what has been elevated. Presenting this in a more refined manner would be beneficial. 

One area that needs improvement is the hierarchy of permissions. Sometimes ThreatLocker's built-in elevations or apps overtake, leading to conflicts.

I have used the solution for six months in total, with it being in production for three months.

It is super stable. I have not had any issues yet. Knock on wood. It has been great.

It is simple. As long as you have the licenses, you can scale as far as you like. We scaled it in three months to the entire organization. It is very scalable and fast, reaching 4,000 computers in three months, which is pretty nice.

Cyber Heroes are awesome. I can open a chat with them and probably get my question answered within a few minutes. If they need to elevate, they can, or we have our meetings with our contact, Blaine, every two weeks. Those meetings are for higher-level topics, but he is very easy to work with.

Any time I have had to put in a ticket, it has been worked on within the same day or the next hour. This support ranks at the top of all the different software I use.

Positive

We used CyberArk. It would not update itself and was causing blue screens. It even blocked emails and did other unwanted actions. We had it set up to do the bare minimum, and it would sometimes do vastly different things that we did not want it to do. That was one issue.

The updates were blocked, so we could not uninstall it for machines. The dashboard was outdated. Even with a switch to a cloud solution, it was not intuitive. In this age, it is insane to have a console that is not intuitive and looks out of date. It is probably an out-of-date software, and that definitely reflected in our experience.

The initial setup was extremely easy. I did a lot of the packaging and deployment. Once deployed, it shows up in the console within five to ten minutes whenever the machine checks in. No matter where you are in the world, it just works.

We used Access IT. They have always been great. They are super easy to work with. They streamlined the whole process and got us on board quickly.

ThreatLocker is a little cheaper than our last app, and we could continue to save money as we utilize its other aspects. It is doing so much more for our company, which is amazing. Adding more features and eliminating others could save even more and provide more proven value. It has saved us about 25,000 a year.

We have been using it only for about six months. It has only been in production for three months, but we have been testing it for six months. It is a short time, but it has already saved us so much time.

The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long. The only long piece was the legal lease. Other than that, the only thing that held us up was the holidays. It was more on our end than on their end. The cost structure and everything else seemed very fair and well laid out.

We evaluated BeyondTrust and a smaller company. BeyondTrust’s presentation ran on Windows 7, whereas in 2024, we were on Windows 11. That was an issue for us. 

A significant issue with the other solution was that the UAC prompts were not working anymore. You had to use their software, which pretty much gave up administrators' ability to elevate when needed.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a ten out of ten.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it helps us with endpoint security platforms and unauthorized application and process running. It also helps us with storage control and elevations.

I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for ransomware protection, such as when ransomware.encrypt.exe tries to execute and encrypt files. I also use it for server protection, only approving services and applications that can run in production on the server.

In my opinion, the best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers are ransomware protection, server protection, script control, and least privileges.

The script control and least privilege features help us block attacks, such as when someone tries to run a bad script or use other scripting engines. For example, if a phishing email contains a macro, it executes the policy, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helps us not to approve or restrict the policy, enhancing our security. Additionally, least privilege means users do not receive permanent local administrator rights; instead, they get temporary elevation. For instance, installing Wireshark prompts for administrator permission normally, but in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, it requests elevation, and an administrator has to approve it.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization by providing excellent safety measures and an all-in-one package that benefits everyone, not just administrators.

Since implementing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I have significantly reduced the risk of malware and ransomware execution by blocking several unauthorized applications by default. I also reduce the number of users with local administrator privileges, and overall, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform reduces my attack surface, improves compliance, and provides better visibility.

While ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is a strong zero trust platform, especially for application allowance and least privileges, areas for improvement include policy management, reporting dashboards, user experience, and notifications. More detailed, real-time alerts and clearer remediation guidance would help administrators respond more quickly. Overall, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is an efficient zero trust platform, but it could be improved with automated policy recommendations for easier management in larger environments, along with dashboard and reporting integrations with security tools for a simpler user interface and administration.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for the past two years.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's scalability as nine.

Customer support for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is rated as ten.

I previously used Cloudflare Zero Trust, which I find quite different compared to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

I find the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to be efficient, although I do not directly manage financial aspects.

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

A quick, specific example of how I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for endpoint security or storage control in my day-to-day work is that we observed the blocking of PowerShell. A user received a phishing email with a malicious Word document that tried to execute powershell.exe, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform provided us with the policy for this malicious winword.exe, blocking the launching of powershell.exe. Additionally, there was one browser download malware we observed, where invoice.exe was downloaded via Chrome, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform blocked the execution.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helps us save on operational costs to some extent, though I cannot specify the financial aspect. It is very effective for us and my organization.

I have used the Ring Fencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, and it has been very effective, allowing approved applications to run while restricting risky behaviors such as launching PowerShell or command prompt and accessing sensitive resources. This significantly reduces the attack surface without impacting normal business operations. For example, when Microsoft Word runs within the ring fencing, I can block the launching of PowerShell or cmd.exe, preventing malicious macros from executing PowerShell commands, with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform handling this directly within the application.

The efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites is very effective. Real-time threat intelligence helps block known malicious phishing websites, while category controls enforce user policies. This is also helpful for auditing purposes, as new domains are blocked even if users redirect mistakenly.

The storage control feature in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is very useful as it helps enforce policy-driven access and reduces excessive access granting.

The DAC dashboard helps identify security configuration issues that require attention by providing a centralized view of endpoint security, policy compliance, and recommended actions, making it easier for administrators to address and maintain a secure environment.

Application allow listing avoids detecting malicious software post-execution, instead following a default deny approach where only approved applications, scripts, and libraries can execute, significantly reducing ransomware and unauthorized software risk.

I use the Elevation Control feature in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, where a developer needing to install Wireshark submits an elevation request. After approval, only Wireshark is granted temporary administrator privileges for installation. Once the installation task is completed, the elevated access automatically ends.

I rate this product a nine out of ten overall.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is application control. I use application control to manage which applications are allowed to run on company devices. This helps prevent unauthorized software and reduces the risk of malware. I create an allow list for approved applications and review when a user needs software installed.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is straightforward and reduces cybersecurity risks and attack risks by blocking unknown and unapproved applications, giving me more control over security.

The application control feature that allows only approved applications to run is beneficial, and it restricts what the approved applications can do. For example, it prevents a document renderer from launching PowerShell, which helps block ransomware and malware. Additionally, storage control helps in managing external USB drives or external storage.

The governance and security capabilities of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform are strong, especially the AI aspect, as it provides good visibility and policy enforcement that makes it far more consistent for me to manage across the organization.

Its accuracy and reliability of output are generally accurate and useful for security-related information, helping reduce manual effort and identify important events more quickly.

The allow-listing feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is effective for managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices.

I have used the ring fencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, and it protects me very effectively by preventing actions such as a document accessing PowerShell or sensitive files.

I do use the elevation control feature in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, mostly to give admin access without granting full administrator rights. Certain applications or specific internal software need admin access to manage effectively.

The storage control feature is effective when it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices.

The real-time threat intelligence allows me to surface events very quickly, which is an important feature, especially when an event is happening in real-time. The category control makes policy management more efficient and consistent throughout the organization, helping reduce manual effort.

Technically, there is a learning curve for the initial policy tuning, but apart from that, I cannot provide insights on how to improve the software itself.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for around a year.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

It is scaling well overall with my organization.

Before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I evaluated some other options, including CrowdStrike and Microsoft Endpoint Defender.

I would advise others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to take time to plan and tune policies during implementation. Start with a pilot group, understand your application, understand your requirements, and then scale the deployment.

The biggest positive impact ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has had on my organization is improved security. The control over what software can run across the organization reduces the risk of unauthorized applications, improves visibility for the IT team, and makes it easier to enforce security policies consistently. I have spent less time investigating software-related security concerns because of the application's control over security.

The best benefit of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is better control over what runs on my endpoints and improved protection.

I purchased ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform through AWS Marketplace, with an AWS agent suggesting it to me and providing access to this solution.

I did not completely replace any major security tools because of this platform; the security tools I have are working alongside it. However, it did help consolidate some application control and policy enforcement functions into a single platform.

I do not have the exact cost figures since I am not directly involved in budgeting, but I would state the savings were more operational than direct costs.

It is straightforward to identify which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard. While it takes a learning curve, overall, if you are involved with cybersecurity, it would be straightforward.

I used ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for the first time. I would rate this product an eight out of ten.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to prevent unauthorized applications from running on client computers.

There have been a number of cases where someone was about to get hit by ransomware, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was able to stop the executable and alert us immediately to prevent unauthorized applications.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization by blocking a lot of potential hack attempts through blocking ransomware and preventing unauthorized applications from running.

I cannot think of any specific outcomes or metrics such as a reduction in incidents or time saved for my team.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has definitely lessened the amount that other security tools would have to do.

I cannot provide specifics on whether ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform helped my organization save on operational costs or expenses, but it has helped prevent issues that would have cost a lot to work through, such as in the case of ransomware, trying to get everything restored from backups and get computers back up and running, which could potentially amount to a large cost.

The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers include the blocking of unauthorized applications, which is crucial for our clients, such as an engineering firm where the engineers and people working in the field would always want new applications and would download them themselves and try to install them. They get blocked by ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, allowing us to recognize the applications they were trying to use, go through vetting processes, and either allow or deny depending on our final say as their IT department.

For the most part, the process of vetting and approving new applications was straightforward, although there were some situations where there would be really obscure software that might not have been signed with a software certificate, and I would have to either do hash matching or use some other method depending on how the application worked.

Overall, the allow-listing feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helped a lot to keep things going on the right path, and I have used the Ringfencing feature, which I assess positively in controlling the behavior of approved applications.

I am not sure how easy or difficult it is to identify which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard.

I do not believe we used the data storage access control and storage control feature when it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices.

The only improvement I could think of for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is having a basic consumer version that might be free to do basic whitelisting of applications.

There were cases where ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform blocked something but did not make it obvious that it was blocked, and we had to go through troubleshooting other things and eventually tried disabling ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform temporarily on the computer. That resolved the issue, so we then knew that we needed to add a ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform rule, which is why my rating is not a ten.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for about two years.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform seemed infinitely scalable to me when using it.

I did not have to deal with customer support regarding ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

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

I was not involved with that side of things regarding return on investment, and I cannot share any relevant metrics such as fewer employees needed, money saved, or time saved.

I was not involved in the pricing, setup cost, and licensing aspects of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

I was not involved in evaluating other options before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

I rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a nine out of ten.

Regarding ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities, I did not have too much experience with that, and I have not really had a chance to explore the AI capabilities of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

My advice to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to use it, as it really helps secure workstations and makes sure that no insecure or flawed software ends up running on those computers.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform depends on the day, whether it's helping clients install applications for printers or certain software they use.

For example, today I had a client that needed me to use a built-in installer for HP so that they could update their machine to the printer and be able to print with HP Smart.

Right now, I am studying for the Cyber Hero certification and trying to learn more about how to integrate it into people's networks to ensure RDP connections are done properly.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted our organization by helping us manage the software that clients have on their applications, ensuring that everything has been thoroughly vetted.

It has made our software management easier by helping us figure out exactly what we need to do during onboarding for new clients, especially with the learning mode.

Based on my experience, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform hasn't necessarily eliminated any security tools or solutions; it's been an additional resource for every client that we recommend, especially when onboarding new clients with learning mode.

In my opinion, the best features that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers are that it helps ensure clients are not installing malicious software and allows us to double-check that we're keeping up to date with all the applications they're using, so they don't have any bloatware.

ThreatLocker helps me keep up to date with applications and prevent bloatware, and I am involved in setting up the integrated parts of that within my company. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform integrates great with our ticket system on Autodesk.

Regarding ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities, I feel confident that it's trusted not only by many corporations but also by numerous government entities, indicating that it will be around for a long time. I haven't noticed any hiccups regarding its accuracy and reliability of output when it comes to AI capabilities, but I acknowledge that anything involving AI has a huge learning curve for all of us.

In terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on devices, I think the allowlisting feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is very fluent.

We have used the ringfencing feature with ThreatLocker, and while I haven't worked with it long enough to provide an adequate answer, I believe it has a significant impact.

Network control feature works perfectly, and I don't have any feedback regarding its impact on managing network traffic across our endpoints and servers.

We use the elevation control feature in ThreatLocker all the time, and I think it's excellent for facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications.

Regarding the storage control feature, I find it great, and it's something we're still working on with many clients to emphasize its importance for cybersecurity.

Identifying which security and configuration settings need fixing using the TAC Dashboard is, so far, super cohesive and makes sense.

I haven't had enough hands-on experience to assess the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by web control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites.

At the moment, I can't adequately speak about how ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform can be improved, as I'm still learning a lot about it, but it seems to be a very well-thought-out organization, and I believe they're in the top 500 companies in the US.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for about five months.

From my experience, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

As for the scalability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, it seems to be working perfectly, and I don't have any feedback.

Customer support has been excellent; they are always helpful.

At this company, I haven't previously used a different solution, but at my last company, I experienced a lot of manual integration that was clunky, so ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is ideal.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is deployed in our organization in various ways, including public cloud, private cloud, hybrid cloud, and on-premises, as we have many clients.

Cloud provider we use most often with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is Azure.

My advice to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to ensure that everyone goes through the Cyber Hero certification to understand the granular details of how to use it and to reach out to their customer support, as they are very helpful.

Overall, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a nine on a scale from one to ten because there's always room for improvement for every application, and I wouldn't ever give anything a perfect ten because there's always room for improvement.

I used ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform quite a bit from monitoring to allowing applications or DLLs through. Mainly, I used it for allowing applications through ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform. We worked with quite a few large corporations, so often an IT manager or someone running a project would need a rule created so that when the project flowed, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform allowed certain installers to go through. That was primarily the main use. It also stopped many people from running bad applications on the machines, as issues would get flagged quite quickly.

In a sense, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform did lock down many sites and stopped a lot of bad content from coming through. We blocked quite a lot of content. It controlled everything so you didn't have everyone doing what they wanted to do. It was a very good control mechanism and the interface was quite easy to work with. We used it combined with Datto. We used the Kaseya suite, so through Datto we would get alerts for any ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform issues, and then from there we would follow the correct procedures and sort everything out.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is quite good as it runs. I couldn't say anything to improve it. It is a nice granular application and does serve the purpose of what it needs to, and it is quite efficient. It does combine with different RMM systems. Basically, you're getting the best of both.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was quite good at blocking bad scripts and stopping malware, and it informed you quite quickly. The user interface, once you got used to it, was quite easy to use once you got used to the workflows. It served a good purpose overall.

We used to have different rules or policies per client that would allow certain applications while other clients wouldn't have it with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

I would say it was efficient, especially having one global way of looking after many different clients. Per client, you could also customize what they could see and what they couldn't see, or what applications they could use. It was very beneficial in a sense because you didn't have everyone running whatever they wanted. Everything was controlled and monitored, and you'd have an application set created for each application or whatever was running. It was quite granular, so you could go right down and stop certain things from running and certain things from not running.

Regarding the Ringfencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I'm not too familiar with it, or if I'm not understanding it correctly, I don't believe so.

It was reasonably easy because ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform gives you a breakdown of different means that you can block something. You can block it in various ways as it's very granular, with various options to allow and block different applications, using hash tags and other methods. Each application running would have a specific identifier that you should be able to pick up quite easily from ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform interface. From there, you could also run tests to make sure the application hasn't been blocked somewhere else and it's not coming in the spam way. It's a very nice granular application.

I wasn't working too much on that level with the Zero Trust Endpoint Firewall network control feature. I was more on level one and level two. That would have been handled by different departments. Our security operations would have looked after the more in-depth side of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, while we looked after the more top side.

I did work with the Privileged Access Management Elevation Control feature. That's when you're creating a policy and you have to allow it if the user can run it or if it needs admin access to run. I did a little bit on that side.

It did help with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, although we also often ran everything in conjunction with Intune. We had a double layer of policies in a manner of speaking, where some are allowed, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was more just for blocking anything that shouldn't be running.

I didn't go too much into the storage side with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, to be honest.

I think it was quite good because we ran through Datto, so as soon as ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform popped something up, we'd get an alert through our ticketing system quite quickly that there was something wrong, and then we could action it quite quickly. If we couldn't help it, then we would escalate it up to our security operations team. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform did serve quite a good purpose overall.

A slightly more modernized interface for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform would be nice, but the interface does its job for what it needs to at the moment.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is quite granular and comprehensive as it is. The features it actually does serve its purpose.

I haven't worked on ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform in six months, but before that, I used it for about two and a half years. Due to positions within the company, they stopped some of us from having access to it.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform seemed to have run well. I didn't pick up many issues where there were any major problems along the line. It always seemed to be quite a stable platform. I can't actually recall any outages. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was quite good overall.

I haven't had any problems with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform. It normally ran quite well.

I never dealt with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform customer service and technical support, so it would be quite hard to say, which I suppose is also a good thing. I wouldn't be able to comment on that.

We did use Webroot, but that's slightly different. I didn't work with much recently because most people who were running solutions were running either ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform. Although, many people started moving over to Windows Defender. I did start noticing where everyone started falling more under the actual Microsoft umbrella instead of using different third parties. I did do a little bit of work with RocketCyber, but that's slightly different and more focused on sign-ins and compromised accounts rather than on ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform side. I also did a little bit of work with Webroot, but that's also slightly different and more focused on the antivirus side.

We had a project team that used to run that with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform. We were more on the support side, on the client support side.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform would have helped our clients more. I was working in an MSP environment, so from there we supported numerous clients who were running ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform. Overall, I think it did provide return on investment. You didn't have too many security breaches or anything on that side. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was doing its job.

I was more on the support side for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, so we didn't get across the setup cost too much.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was what the MSP was using when I started working there, so I just learned as I went on.

There's nothing negative. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform does what it's meant to do. It has more positives than negatives.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is to block unwanted software that we have. There are a lot of randomness that people have on their laptops, so we get control over that and make sure they are not doing what they are not supposed to be doing.

My favorite feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is the approval to elevate a system for an amount of time, which is a nice feature. We can say, 'Hey, we're going to let you elevate this, so if you need to run something you can do that,' without having to have any kind of in-between for IT.

The feature benefits our company by saving us time at the end of the day. If it is something that we know that they can install on their own, it is something that we do not have to worry about. We can just have them do it on their own and save us time. Overall, I am not exactly sure how much time it has been saving with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, but it could save up to an hour of time by scheduling meetings to get availability and have it installed.

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 that it makes it easier overall to have it in a place where you can go and see it all. It is just easier for IT.

We do use the Elevation Control feature. My assessment of the Elevation Control feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications is that it is good. If there are things that we know that are safe to have, we can save ourselves time by just having them go out and install it on their own. It definitely makes it easier on us.

We have used the Ringfencing feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, though I have not personally used it yet. I am still kind of getting into it.

We have partially used the Web Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. Once we got it, we went through and blocked the extensions. There were a lot of random third-party extensions people had installed on their browsers, so we did a full block on all extensions and made people come ask about what extensions they need.

I think the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant elements has done its job. It is good to see what they have and what they can request, and we can dig down and see what the actual extension is doing and determine if it is good or not.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for a couple of months now, probably about six to eight months. So not too long.

The stability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has been good. I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues. Most of the issues we have had have been on our side, such as internet-based issues. Connection and everything else has been good.

The scalability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has been good. It definitely benefits us to have that extra layer of protection and to be able to be more flexible when it comes to the software and approvals.

Customer service and technical support for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are good. They make it really easy to submit a ticket or do a quick chat with them to get in contact with somebody quickly and make it easy.

Positive

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, I do not think we have looked into eliminating or consolidating any security tools or solutions yet. We are just still kind of testing it out and making sure it is good.

We have not purchased the Network Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. We have not purchased the Storage Control feature either. We have the DAC Dashboard feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, but we probably have not used it.

My learning process of applying ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform involves figuring out how to set up the pathings for the Allowlist, knowing what to wildcard, and understanding what ThreatLocker looks for and what you need to address when you are making those approvals.

The main learning curve for me at the start was just kind of figuring out what they look for. I think once you get into it and learn it, it is pretty good and simple.

From one to ten, I would probably rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform overall a nine. I would say probably just to try it out because it does not hurt to see what it is about, and more than likely they would probably be impressed by how beneficial it is for an IT team.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is blocking certain applications, running updates, and managing similar administrative tasks.

A quick specific example of how I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to block applications or manage updates is that if there's an application that we no longer allow, we'll put it into the system and then it sends it out to the company. It can also do the same thing for updates.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization, and the blocking capabilities have been very beneficial. It's very easy to use, and you have a bird's-eye view over all the devices connected to your network.

I have noticed fewer security incidents and saved time managing devices.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I am not sure if our organization has been able to eliminate or consolidate any security tools or solutions, as I do not make those decisions.

The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers are the blocking capabilities, the updates to the whole company, and the ease for the employee, as it just runs in the background for them.

The feature that has the biggest impact on my daily work is the blocking applications capability, so employees can stay focused on their work and not download malware.

It is very easy to use and integrates into any sort of laptop and device, as well as it scans almost any application that you have.

In terms of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities, I think it does a good job regarding its governance and security.

I haven't worked with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI, so I cannot answer about its accuracy and reliability of output.

I am not sure about my impression of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's Allowlisting feature in managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices, as I do not run that.

I have not used the Ringfencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, so I cannot assess its impact on controlling the behavior of approved applications.

It is very easy to identify which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard.

I would 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 efficient.

I think there can be improvements in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, but I have nothing specific to mention.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for about two years.

I find ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to be stable.

I am not sure about ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's scalability, as I have not worked with that aspect.

Customer support for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was good.

I would rate the customer support a 10 on a scale of one to 10.

I am not sure if I previously used a different solution or which solution it was and why I switched.

I cannot share a return on investment or relevant metrics such as money or time saved or fewer employees needed.

I am not sure about my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing, as I did not do that.

I did not make the decision to evaluate other options before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a nine on a scale of one to 10.

I chose a nine for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform because I haven't worked with it enough to give it that perfect rating of 10.

My overall review rating for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 9 out of 10.

I have no idea what advice I would give to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is controlling which applications can be stored or installed on users' workstations, aside from security purposes.

One specific example of how I plan to use ThreatLocker for that purpose is when a user tries to install a particular application, they need to submit a request for that application to be installed. On our side, we check what that application is, and then we either grant or deny permission.

For now, that is my main use of the application.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has impacted my organization positively because we are able to check whether the software or application that we need to install is safe.

This has led to fewer unauthorized installs and improved security in a measurable way.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, my organization has been able to consolidate security tools and solutions, particularly on the application control side, where we need to approve or deny the applications that are requested for installation.

The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers include the ability to identify applications that need to be installed and check if they might include adware or ransomware. ThreatLocker helps us do more checks on the application side before installing it on a workstation.

ThreatLocker has made it easier for my team to check or block potentially risky applications before they are installed because the features are easy to navigate and very ergonomic.

Regarding the user interface, a pop-up appears on the user's side telling them they need to request that the application be installed on their computer. They send the request, and we receive a notification via email. In the same way, the user receives the approval via email notification.

Regarding ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities, it has helped me a lot as a desktop support engineer in organizing and allowing applications that need to be installed. ThreatLocker's AI capabilities have been very strict and very consistent in terms of the accuracy and reliability of output, particularly in identifying and managing applications.

ThreatLocker's allowlisting feature helps me manage which software, scripts, and libraries are allowed to run on my devices because there is a list of applications that we allow on the computer, making it easy for us to identify whether these applications or software are allowed or not.

I have used the Ringfencing feature with ThreatLocker, but only around one to two times, so I cannot give complete feedback about that feature.

I have not had any experience yet with the Data Storage Access Control feature for enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices.

Regarding the efficiency of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's real-time threat intelligence and category controls in web content control for blocking malicious or non-compliant sites, I have not had a chance to use this feature yet.

At the moment, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is working fine on our end, and I do not see anything that needs to be improved because we recently started using the application. I think I need at least a year of use so I can encounter things that might need improvement.

After a year of familiarity with all of the features, I may be able to give more feedback about needed improvements in terms of onboarding or user experience for new users.

I find it difficult to identify which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard because I am handling approval of workstation applications and changing the mode of the workstation or computer, such as secured, application learning, and application monitor.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for less than a year, as it is a new product deployed in my company.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is very stable based on my experience, as there has been nothing regarding crashes or downtime.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has been able to handle my organization's growth and changes in demand.

I have not communicated with customer support regarding ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform because we have not encountered any issues so far.

This is the first time that I have used this kind of security solution, meaning I have not used a different solution before ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is deployed in my organization via SCCM on-premises.

I think ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has helped my organization save on operational costs and expenses, but I do not have the data for that right now.

I am not the best person to ask for details regarding the pricing, setup cost, and licensing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

Before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I evaluated other options, but they were more on the antivirus side.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform overall as an eight because I need to check all the features that ThreatLocker has first. I chose an eight as my rating for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform because that is my starting point. My advice to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to use it because it is easy to use, easy to navigate, and very secure. I give ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform an overall rating of eight out of ten.