ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Reviews

I work for an architecture firm. We use ThreatLocker Protect to protect the company's systems from unknown malware by blocking unapproved applications. We encounter a lot of malware and ThreatLocker has been able to help with that.

As an architecture firm, we rely on TAISE’s Cybersecurity-as-a-Service (CaaS) to keep our systems safe from malware threats. TAISE introduced us to ThreatLocker, which has become essential in safeguarding our infrastructure by blocking unapproved applications and defending against unknown malware. Given our exposure to frequent malware, ThreatLocker, through TAISE's expert implementation, has proven invaluable

ThreatLocker Protect is very simple and easy to understand. You do not need much technical knowledge to be able to use it. It is very good. Anybody with a bit of IT knowledge is able to handle it.

Ringfencing adds an extra layer of defense. If an application is compromised, you can just exclude the computer and do your troubleshooting and find out what the problem was. It goes hand in hand with application whitelisting. It has been very helpful. It adds an extra security system which is very much needed for our infrastructure.

ThreatLocker Protect has improved my organization greatly. Before using ThreatLocker Protect, we experienced a malware attack that caused significant damage, corrupting many of our files. Since implementing ThreatLocker Protect, we have not faced any such issues, and our operations have been smooth.

We were able to realize its benefits immediately. No user can install any unknown applications or unauthorized applications on their own. I have been able to manage my systems effectively without any malware.

ThreatLocker Protect has reduced our help desk tickets by about 40%, as every software they use is approved by me before use, limiting unauthorized installations.

ThreatLocker Protect has freed up a lot of time. I do not have to do much with the help desk because our systems are protected with ThreatLocker Protect.

The application whitelisting feature allows us to block and manage approved applications effectively. It ensures that no one can install an application on our systems unless it is approved by me, which is very efficient.

It is very easy to use. When a user sends a request, you can go to the dashboard to view the application that the user wants you to approve. If you are okay with the application, you just click the Approve button to approve. It is very easy.

The support could be quicker. There are times when there is a delay in getting a response. This is problematic when immediate attention is needed.

The stability can also be better.

I have been using ThreatLocker Protect for the past three years.

Stability can be improved as there are times it goes down or requires management to adjust policies. I would rate stability a six out of ten.

It is scalable to an extent, depending on where it is used. I would rate scalability a seven out of ten.

We have one location but multiple departments. Overall, we have 25 users.

Our company is small. I know which applications each user is supposed to use and what they need. Once I get a request, I go over to the application they need to install. If it aligns with the work they do, I approve it.

I would rate their support a five out of ten. It could be better, especially with response times.

We did not use another solution before.

The initial setup was straightforward. Its deployment took about a week.

Our return on investment with ThreatLocker is about 20%.

Its time to value was immediate.

The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost.

I would recommend ThreatLocker Protect to other users as it is a very important tool for IT administrators like me. It helps manage user access and secures the system efficiently.

I would rate ThreatLocker Protect an eight out of ten.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is application control.

I use application control with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to avoid any malicious software being installed or any software outside the company's scope of workflow.

I work with the client to make sure that their policies are tailored to what they need and ensure that any sketchy software reported through requests is brought to the attention of the point of contact to either create a policy or reject it.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization by saving a ton of cleanup during a malicious attack, as it has stopped it in its tracks, and I was able to basically pinpoint the vector of attack if something were to happen.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helped me pinpoint the attack vector by tracing back the last request log for some software that seemed very sketchy, where I found that it had a malicious attachment to the email, so I was able to reject the request and then basically use my other software to perform scans to make sure that the company was okay to keep running.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I am unable to eliminate or consolidate any security tools or solutions due to my business model.

The best features that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers are definitely application control, storage control, and web control.

Out of application control, storage control, and web control, the feature that stands out to me as the most valuable in my day-to-day work is application control.

Regarding ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities, I think its governance and security are perfectly fine, as it blocks and has a bunch of built-in policies that will help curb the amount of information given out to AI.

I think ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities are very accurate, and I do not have an issue with it at all.

I think the solutions work out for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices, as the amount of built-in policies that they already have in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helps me create these policies quicker.

I have used the Ring Fencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, and I think it works very well, as it stops network traffic from anywhere that I do not think is necessary and basically puts the power back in my hands.

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 a 10 out of 10, as it does its best to detect anything that's outside the scope after learning mode, and then I can review it myself.

I have no suggestions on how ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform can be improved, as it works very well.

There are no improvements needed for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform that I have not mentioned yet.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for a little over five years.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

The scalability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is great, and customer support is fantastic.

I would rate the customer support of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform on a scale of one to 10 as a 10.

I did not previously use a different solution.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is deployed in my organization through my RMM software.

My RMM software is hosted in the cloud.

I use Datto as my cloud provider.

Before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I did not evaluate other options, as I used ThreatLocker when I was first hired here.

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

I feel ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform deserves a 10 because they have been super helpful since the beginning when I was onboarding them and have been super helpful any time that I need support, and my clients love the software.

My advice to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to definitely demo it first and see how it works for you and definitely see the comfortability of the clients in waiting for their requests to be answered.

I have rated ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a 10 overall.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is the protection of our servers and endpoints from potential cyber threats.

A quick specific example of how I use it for protection is that it helps in whitelisting applications and ensures that only business applications are running on servers and endpoints, blocking any other services that are not whitelisted.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform also helps in reviewing threats detected and blocked by the platform in my environment.

The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers would be its capability of whitelisting known applications and in-house applications, and also in proactively blacklisting ones which are not utilized in our organization.

The allow-listing capability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform compared to other tools I've used before does give a sense of security for our organization when ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is working efficiently, and it also helps in making sure that our IT team and our security teams are well aligned in terms of whitelisting.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization by making sure that developers and other users do not utilize applications which are not allowed as per our IT policy.

It does help in ensuring that threats are reduced, the attack surface is reduced, and our team is not overwhelmed with too many alerts.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform serves its purpose effectively, and there is nothing much to highlight about how it can be improved at the moment.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for the last three years.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

The scalability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is straightforward, and we can scale up when required.

We have not required customer support for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

This is the first zero-trust solution we have implemented, and I did not previously use a different solution.

I have seen a return on investment with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform; I require about three fewer people in my team.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has saved on people costs since the application does the job.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is straightforward, and there are no issues.

I evaluated other options, specifically Zscaler and CrowdStrike, before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my organization has been able to consolidate certain features such as application control; I can use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform instead of application control on the firewall.

My impression of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's allow-listing feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it is most useful and is the main purpose of this 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 useful.

My advice to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that you can look into a proof of concept before you buy. I give this solution a review rating of ten out of ten.

I primarily use it on servers. We deal with smaller customers, and they don't always have the money to get it on every endpoint. The main thing exposed to the internet is, of course, the server, RDP, and other functions. 

We have some customers that have it on the endpoint. In the past few years of using ThreatLocker, I haven't experienced ransomware on servers. However, there are small occurrences on endpoints when they're not using ThreatLocker.

With ThreatLocker, we don't have shadow IT, and it has reduced ransomware. 

We have a lot of companies concerned with compliance. They have an application list, and anything outside of that application list is not allowed. ThreatLocker makes that really easy for us since you just allow what they need, and no one can run anything else.

Ringfencing is a valuable feature. If someone gains access to something or some end user attempts to run malicious PowerShell commands to download malware, it simply doesn't allow it. It's like saying, I'm not permitted to reach out to this. 

ThreatLocker eliminates shadow IT and reduces ransomware. We have many companies that need compliance. They have an application list, and anything outside of that list is not allowed. ThreatLocker makes this easy by allowing only what we need, preventing us from running anything else. 

Previously, I used AppLocker, a Windows tool, which is a lot of work to manage. ThreatLocker reduced work, allowing us to hire fewer people for this job. The time saved from not having to do recovery when malware runs, which can't happen with ThreatLocker, also saves money.

It's fairly easy to use. It has a learning curve. However, if you go to the university, you should be fine. And if you don't know something, you can just click the chat button. You'll be chatting with someone in 30 seconds.

It reduces work. It helps us save on operational costs that way. You can hire fewer people or move people onto other stuff. People can be moved to other tasks. We likely save one FTE a year, so it saves us around 30,000 euros.

We can block access very well. They are doing their job. 

It reduces the amount of time a ticket takes to action. 

It doesn't really have to do with ThreatLocker as a company. It's really annoying when other companies don't sign their executables with a certificate, requiring new rules for new files. It would be beneficial if it became more recognized in the EU to gain respect. That's about the only issue I can think of.

I have used the solution for a little bit more than three years now.

It's really stable. Once deployed, it downloads the policies locally, so even if the computer doesn't have internet, it doesn't matter. It still works.

The scalability is great. I can put as many endpoints in it as I like.

The customer service is very good. If I need someone, I hit the chat button, and 30 seconds later, there is someone there to help me.

Neutral

I used the Windows built-in AppLocker, and that was it.

We use RMM to deploy the agent.

The initial setup had its ups and downs. That was all on us. We tried to roll it out for everyone at the same time. I'd advise against that.

I had a Solutions Engineer help me. He was from ThreatLocker.

I would estimate savings equivalent to one person per year, which is about 30,000 euros in our country. Not dealing with recovery when malware runs, as it can't run, saves a lot of time and money. The subscription includes help desk time, saving us even more.

The setup is quite cheap, considering what it does.

I didn't evaluate a different solution before choosing this one. Afterwards, I looked at Cyberfox for the elevation control, however, it was unsatisfactory.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

If something isn't working, you get a helpdesk ticket. If they don't know the answer, they escalate and eventually hop on a call with you without automatically closing tickets. It's been great. My Solutions Engineer has been fantastic. Even as he's moved up within the company, I can still call him.

We're a managed service provider, mostly dealing with small business office environments, so ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is used in the context of many different tools. It's a unification of several different tools. Their front and center is their Application Control, where I believe the older, less correct name for it would be application whitelisting. Basically, it ensures that nothing can run within a given environment. As long as the machine is protected by ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, nothing can run within an environment that is not considered kosher by the admin.

If you don't allow it, it doesn't run with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. It's as simple as that. I've had it block PowerShell scripts that my RMM has sent through. It's one of those things that in the moment, it's really annoying. However, the implication is that if that were anybody else, they wouldn't have been able to allow it.

I deal with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. It provides peace of mind because it unifies a lot of different tools, including managed detection and response and Endpoint Detection and Response.

The single pane of glass management for all this functionality is really the best feature. It unifies many utilities that would have been separate costs before, and it lets us sleep at night knowing that things are being monitored 24 hours.

The ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform auditing capabilities have provided valuable insights for us and have stopped several would-be malware infections.

Going with the theme of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform being a one-stop shop where they have just about everything, and they have a really good product stack as is. However, the one last thing I would want to see is mail security implemented similar to how Mail Protector does theirs, except obviously managed and included in a subscription tier with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

It's pretty easy to deploy as far as this functionality goes. However, it's very annoying to uninstall. You have to go into the online control panel and disable tampering for a device before it'll let you uninstall it without complaining really loudly. This is actually one of those things that is annoying in day-to-day operation because it assumes you don't know what you're doing. However, I would rather it let me know when it doesn't need to than have a situation where our protection is just being disabled and nothing's being done about it.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a nine. There's a little bit of smoothing they could do, but most of my annoyances with it are with the concept as a whole and there's not really anything anyone can do to fix them. It comes with the territory. It's not really something that they in particular could improve upon.

I have dealt with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for a couple of years at this point.

The support with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is phenomenal. Utterly phenomenal. I literally don't think I have ever waited more than a minute to hear back.

Positive

We've been Blackpoint customers for MDR, EDR before ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. They did not offer the Application Control or the network control, the storage control. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform added the MDR, EDR functionality as a logical extension of what they do with the application whitelisting, with the network control, with the storage control. It was just a logical extension. But Blackpoint only ever offered the MDR, EDR functionality. And as far as I know, they were only just starting to branch out into Application Control before we moved over to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

The zero-trust approach of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped us pass certain certifications for cybersecurity. The zero-trust portion means that it's a little more annoying than traditional security software. However, you know for a fact that it's working because you can watch it stop stuff in real-time.

I do use the Application Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. It is about as straightforward as you could hope for a tool. They offer many deployment options. They have an agent installer you can download. They have a deployment script that you can push through your RMM, or through a Group Policy type implementation.

I'm not very familiar with the pricing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. I don't look at the numbers typically as I focus on technological aspects and implementation. From what I understand, our licensing costs are actually fairly reasonable. For the tier we're at now, it's approximately $10 an endpoint, and we're easily able to upsell that. We're covering our costs and then a little bit on top. It's such a useful tool that if I were making the decision, I would probably even sell it at a loss and take a little bit of a chunk out of other managed service profit margins if necessary. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is just that useful.

The way Ringfencing helps limit application actions is by allowing an application to run. However, that application is not allowed to talk to certain common threat vectors such as scripting hosts, PowerShell, macros, etc. That's how it's configured by default. You can configure it however you want. For example, I could stop Chrome from talking to Word if needed.

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

We're currently deploying 15,000 machines. For us, it is quite easy, however, the problem is that our environment is complicated to deploy due to many customizations. That said, with ThreatLocker, it is not a problem. 

It's getting better in terms of cost and transparency. We can see security improving and can show our evolution. 

The control list is the best feature. For our company, it provides value to our customers since they can see we are improving our security. It also helps us understand what is happening in the machines with notify audits. The solution shows evolution and helps us troubleshoot, even when installed on only some machines.

We can reduce attack surface. We have over 1500 sysadmins, and without it, it was hard to control permissions.

We hope in the future it will help us reduce costs.

We can block access to unauthorized applications. With all of the sysadmins, it had been quite difficult to block everything manually. We have more control over our environment now.

It helps us to see what's happening in the environment and can help us troubleshoot. Once we install across all machines, we can see better what's happening. 

There could be options for handling a bulk amount of machines simultaneously. Randomizing the actions instead of executing everything at once would be beneficial. This would apply to our policies, particularly for the container and Linux versions.

We have been using it for about one year and six months, almost two years.

I have encountered some problems with stabilitiy, however, they are resolved quickly. It is not really a significant issue for me, as they are solved very fast.

The scalability is okay for us. We do not have any problems.

The customer service is very good and very fast.

Neutral

Previously, we used another solution, including a solution from ManageEngine. We switched to ThreatLocker because we felt secure using it, especially with Cyber Heroes and the learning mode.

The implementation was done in-house by me.

We are seeing a return on investment, especially with our managers and customers. We are protecting them and enhancing our security. They all feel safer with this solution.

The setup cost is good, but money in Brazil is quite expensive. Despite the Brazilian economic issues, it is manageable when considering the dollar.

We just have one alternate solution in mind, which includes control mechanisms. We tested some others but liked this one a lot. We need to finish the first part.

My overall product rating is nine out of ten.

Many of our firms are currently using ThreatLocker, and they have been very happy with it. It can block unauthorized software from being downloaded. 

A few years back, we had an attack on one of our biggest clients. After that, we implemented ThreatLocker. For the last couple of years, there have been no issues or attacks. This has been really helpful.

Currently, we are not using the full range of modules, however, we are using ThreatLocker elevation. That's really good. 

The deployment is very easy.

We've been able to save some operational costs and expenses by using this product. However, the main thing is that it protects our customers. 

The zero-trust endpoint availability is good. It can block unknown applications straight away.

We have reduced help desk tickets. It helps with management. We have a good team in place. 

Some reporting areas need improvement. We need to generate more reports. That area should be improved. We'd like reporting on if someone tried to install software, we'd like to be able to generate reports on what was blocked.

I have been using ThreatLocker for the past four years.

Stability is good; it is a growing business. Over the last four years, it has grown significantly.

Scalability is good. There has been no impact in the last couple of years.

Support is good, with very quick support from Cyber Heroes if any staff requires help. From our side, they are really helpful.

Neutral

We did not use another solution previously.

The initial setup is good; deploying is very easy.

We are managing the implementation ourselves.

It's protecting our customers. That is the main thing. That's our ROI.

In the last couple of years, the price has remained the same. Nothing has changed, and it's good. I hope it will not increase soon.

We did not evaluate other options. 

The overall rating of the solution is eight out of ten. We need to improve the reporting side, including reporting and generating reports. That area needs to be improved.

I have a lot of clients, and I am responsible for protecting them by ensuring their environments are safe and up-to-date.

The major benefit is just fewer breaches overall. No one can run anything without it being approved first. ThreatLocker is helping companies protect themselves.

Being able to protect and trust nothing by default, known as zero trust, is the most important feature to me. The major benefit is fewer breaches overall, as nothing can be run without prior approval. This helps my company protect its data and secure itself effectively.

Attack surfaces are easy to control. It's easy to deploy and protects very well.

We've been able to consolidate security tools using ThreatLocker. We used to use SentinelOne and it wasn't doing exactly what we wanted. It wasn't detecting anything. 

It's great at blocking access to unauthorized applications. By default, it trusts nothing. 

We do get more tickets for application requests, however, that's not a bad thing, since it's protecting our environment. 

The user experience could be improved. Most complaints we get are based on users wanting certain functionality. For the most part, built-in applications are pretty good, however, having more would be beneficial.

I have been using it for about two to three years now.

It has great stability without any negative aspects.

I believe it's scalable, whether the client is small or large. It is beneficial regardless of the size.

I have experienced amazing support. Whenever I have an issue, I click the chat button, and someone is always available to assist me. Escalations go smoothly, and I have never encountered support issues.

Positive

I used to use a tool called SentinelOne before switching to ThreatLocker. SentinelOne was not meeting my needs and did not detect issues effectively. I now also use Huntress, but ThreatLocker has been a huge help by blocking anything unapproved.

I deployed it with our RMM, which made it really easy. It was much simpler than it would be with a different program. I set up the tenant, changed a few settings, checked a box, and deployed it. The process was fast and efficient, with the devices appearing quickly and no slowness.

I would stress the importance of saving companies from breaches. The cost versus benefit of ThreatLocker is significant, as its small cost offers great advantages. If something were to happen without ThreatLocker, the cost would be huge, and thus, having it is definitely worth it.

In meetings, they mention 'set it and forget it.' While this can be efficient, it might leave applications unaudited over time, possibly opening vulnerabilities. Regular auditing and reviews would enhance security. 

I give it a nine out of ten overall, recognizing there is room for improvement.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform was Application Control, but now I use it as a full suite of protection tools.

A specific example of how I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as a full suite of protection tools in my organization is that it helps us perform compliance needs for companies and also Web Control, Application Control, and Network Control as a true zero-trust platform.

It has made a positive impact by consolidating our tools; we used to have too many tools and now we really only need ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, a backup solution, and our RMM.

I have seen benefits from consolidating my security tools down to just ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, a backup solution, and my RMM, as it has saved me time, saved my clients money, and saved us headaches.

The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform offers are Network Control, Application Control, and Storage Control.

Network Control, Application Control, and Storage Control impact my daily workflow significantly, as they give me operational freedom with cyber hero support, reduce the anxiety I have day-to-day, and have improved my overall general mental health because of all of the never feeling alone being reduced to near zero, with a whole team of cyber heroes that are just jumping to help me, and the turnaround is literally a minute in most cases.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by addressing issues with Network Control better.

I have several clients in the last few months that have definitely caused a problem where a domain controller completely destroyed replication once Network Control was put in place, and now our AVD servers in Azure also lose domain trust occasionally and it is intermittent, making it rather hard to prove to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that they really need to look at when there is a VPN in the middle of a domain controller.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for almost three years.

I do not wish to add anything else about the features or the support I receive.

Positive

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a nine out of ten, but it would be ten stars if they would just get this last thing solved for us. My overall rating for this product is nine out of ten.

I have a security service that I sell to my customers, which I provide along with ThreatLocker to deploy one of the essential eight controls.

We've helped to reduce overhead while managing at a large scale. 

The application control is a key feature of ThreatLocker. By using ThreatLocker, I have reduced the overhead of managing application control, eliminating the need for my engineers to manually add applications. 

ThreatLocker automates this process efficiently, allowing me to manage it on a large scale for all of my clients, as well as internally. It helps me produce greater efficiency.

It's easy for IT teams to use regarding reducing attack surfaces. It's easy for us. We can manage everything quite easily.

It's been able to help us eliminate and consolidate security tools. We were using a lot of Windows components and have since gotten rid of them.

We have saved on operational costs. We were spending about four to six hours a week managing requests and now were down to about two hours. 

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's ability to block access to unauthorized applications has been excellent. It's also helped us to provide efficiencies elsewhere and, therefore, invest our time in other things that could benefit us tremendously. It has freed up time by 10% to 20%.

Initially, the learning curve was slightly high for me, however, that has been resolved now. They made a lot of improvements. When I first came on board, it was trickier to learn. Besides that, I can't see much else needing improvement at this stage. ThreatLocker University might offer more now, with additional learning and certifications. Previously, I only had a few demo and engineering sessions and had to learn the rest by myself.

It would be nice if they provided more than an EDR and have an antivirus component to go along with it.

I have been using the solution for about a year and a half now.

The stability had a few hiccups at the start, however, they've worked through a lot of their issues and are pretty responsive in fixing them.

I find scalability quite good.

Customer service has been great. I don't have much experience directly with them, however, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Positive

I used just Windows Defender Application Guard control.

My experience with deployment was straightforward, easy to do, and worked well. I initially rolled it out to one or two clients as a trial and then expanded it to all clients. 

I did not use an integrator, reseller, or consultant for deployment.

The time efficiency I gained has allowed me to invest in other areas of the business. Additionally, I provide a lot of compliance services and communicate my processes to customers efficiently and safely.

The setup cost has been great. I had a really good deal at the time, and it continues to be cost-effective.

I considered Blackpoint as one of the options.

The overall product rating is nine out of ten.