VMware Carbon Black App Control offers sophisticated application whitelisting, endpoint protection, and security for end-of-life systems through a user-friendly console that supports threat detection and incident response.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| VMware Carbon Black App Control | 10.3% |
| ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform | 17.2% |
| Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform | 11.9% |
| Other | 60.6% |
| Type | Title | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Application Control | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Product | Reviews, tips, and advice from real users | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | VMware Carbon Black App Control vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | VMware Carbon Black App Control vs Check Point Application Control | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | VMware Carbon Black App Control vs WatchGuard Firebox | Jun 21, 2026 | Download |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform | 4.2 | 11.9% | 98% | 68 interviewsAdd to research |
| ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform | 4.7 | 17.2% | 98% | 77 interviewsAdd to research |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 4 |
| Large Enterprise | 4 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 31 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 51 |
Designed for effective application control, VMware Carbon Black App Control strengthens security by preventing unauthorized installations and controlling application execution. It enhances visibility and reporting for comprehensive threat analysis. However, users report frequent false positives, especially with system processes and occasionally with approved software. Integration with Mac OS and reporting features need improvement, and the setup process can be complex without assistance. It utilizes user behavior for identifying files or malware, which some find cumbersome.
What are the key features of VMware Carbon Black App Control?Deployed across industries such as finance, healthcare, and government, VMware Carbon Black App Control is used for securing both virtual and physical servers. It acts as a host-based intrusion detection system, and is ideal for lockdown protection, threat analysis, and controlling application access to protect against attacks. Organizations use it to scan for unauthorized virtual machines, enforcing stricter security protocols.
VMware Carbon Black App Control was previously known as CB Protection, Carbon Black CB Protection.
Kaas Tailored, Core-Mark, Indeed, Hologic, Landmark Credit Union, Project Worldwide
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Security Administrator at EJADA | 5.0 | We use VMware Carbon Black App Control to scan our network for unauthorized applications on virtual machines, allowing us to isolate problem VMs and manage application access effectively. Our experience did not mention significant features, improvements, or comparisons to other solutions. |
| Security Solution Architect / vCISO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees | 3.5 | We primarily use VMware Carbon Black App Control for managing application access on endpoints, either by whitelisting or blacklisting. Its valuable visibility feature enhances security, although maintaining application lists requires overhead. We did not consider other solutions or providers. |
| Consultor de Soluções at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees | 5.0 | I highly recommend VMware Carbon Black App Control, rating it ten out of ten. I find its implementation simple and all functions valuable, though it relies on user behavior for identification, not a database. |
| Chief Information Officer at a manufacturing company with 1-10 employees | 5.0 | I highly recommend VMware Carbon Black App Control. It effectively stops undesired applications and offers great visibility and reporting. Despite its complex initial setup requiring support, it's very stable, scalable, and well worth the effort, earning my 10/10 rating. |
| IT Security Solutions Engineer at Softprom | 5.0 | I use Carbon Black AppControl for server and endpoint protection. Its API and EOL system support are valuable, despite complex initial setup. I highly recommend this best solution, also noting good technical support. |
| Cyber Security Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees | 4.0 | I find Carbon Black effective for server protection with excellent application whitelisting, stability, and scalability. However, the reporting is poor, and vendor support is lacking. I rate it 8/10. |
| SOC Manager at Nais Srl | 4.0 | I use Carbon Black for threat protection, finding its console user-friendly, stable, and scalable. Support is good, and pricing competitive. I recommend it, despite wishing for more features found in other solutions. |
| IT Security at a real estate/law firm with 1,001-5,000 employees | 4.0 | This solution effectively blocks unapproved applications for security, but I experience significant false positives, often blocking genuine software even after approval, and Mac OS support needs improvement. Despite this, stability and scalability are good. |
We use App Control to scan the network for virtual machines that have unauthorized applications. We can isolate the problem VMs and control application access.
More than two years.
I rate Carbon Black App Control 10 out of 10 for stability.
I rate App Control six out of 10 for scalability.
I rate Carbon Black App Control five out of 10 for ease of setup. One person is enough to deploy it.
Carbon Black App Control is expensive.
I rate VMware Carbon Black App Control 10 out of 10.
Our primary use case for the application is for whitelisting or blacklisting, either explicitly allowing applications to run on endpoints, which is always troublesome, or making sure there were specific ones that couldn't run. Hence, both are pretty tough, and the applications can be changed so easily.
The visibility is valuable for what is running on the endpoints. From a security perspective, it's always good to know what's running on the endpoint so we can start being able to control it better.
The solution should have overhead in keeping lists of applications that you want don't want to run.
The solution is stable.
The solution is scalable. We have never had any issues with scalability because it has a good reputation as an enterprise solution.
I do not have experience with customer service and support.
The initial setup is straightforward because it's a lightweight agent that must be deployed on the endpoint. Still, some enterprises can struggle with deploying software and assuming they can deploy software and it's pretty straightforward.
I rate the price a six out of ten.
I rate the solution a seven out of ten. My advice to new users of the solution is to identify how many applications are running on their endpoints up front.
Currently, I am changing from Voltage Enterprise EE standards. This is futuristic.
All the functions within VMware Carbon Black App Control are valuable.
Carbon Black does not use the database for identifying the file, the fields, or malware. It's not using the database, but the user behavior.
I have been using VMware Carbon Black App Control for three years.
The implementation is very simple. For clients with up to 5000 users, it takes approximately 32 hours to implement.
I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.
It is like a host-based intrusion detection system. It disallows or stops you from installing undesired applications. Irrespective of whether they are malicious or not, it stops these applications from being installed by the end-users and other applications or processes that might try to install them.
It allows us to have visibility into what's going on with the machines. You can actually look and see what has been installed, when it was installed, and which process installed it. It is really handy when it comes to that.
The visibility, reporting, and the ability to stop or prevent malicious or undesired applications from being installed are the most valuable features.
Its setup is very complex, and it requires guidance from the support team, but it is well worth the effort.
I have been using this solution since 2005.
It is very stable.
We are small potatoes. We only have around 200 machines. We are actually in the middle of a review with it, which we are doing for the first time since we installed it. We're having the original guy who helped us through the implementation, which is rare these days because people usually don't stick around or you wouldn't get them back. He is an excellent security guy who works for VMware, and he told me of a 30,000 plus installation that he has done with 30,000 devices, machines, and servers, which is pretty big.
They are good. I would put them at about a nine out of ten. Their response time could be better, which seems to be a problem with everybody right now, and a lot of it is probably due to COVID.
We didn't use any solution in this space.
Its initial setup is very complex. We got help from their implementation team because if it is not set up properly, you can really hinder the operation of your environment and things won't execute or run. You really have to watch setting it up.
Their implementation team was fantastic in helping with it.
Its price is reasonable and what is expected for these types of products.
It is well worth the effort. It does take some time and effort to set it up with guidance from their support team. They help you, which is very nice.
I would rate VMware Carbon Black App Control a ten out of ten.
We are using this solution to put our servers in lockdown.
Carbon Black AppControl can protect any endpoint, and also on an EOL system. The solution allows only approved applications to be executed on the system.
The Open API allows us to freely combine different security systems into a single group and save time when responding to security incidents.
The initial setup is somewhat complex.
We have been dealing with VMware Carbon Black App Control for one year. During this time we have already made sure that this is the best solution to protect our user machines and servers.
Technical support is good.
I would rate them a ten out of ten.
The initial setup seemed a bit complicated to me.
It was a while back, and I may have taken a day or two to deploy it.
We need one engineer to maintain this product.
Carbon Black is a good product and one that I can recommend.
I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.
We use this product for server architecture protection. We have both virtual and physical servers.
Carbon Black offers a total lockdown solution. It shows us the attacks that are being attempted against our infrastructure, and how it is that we are being protected.
The effectiveness of application whitelisting is very good.
The details it provides have a high degree of granularity. I can perform an in-depth asset event analysis and do an effective application whitelisting.
The reporting is not good and needs to be improved. It is plain and unattractive, and you need to do a lot of sorting to get it done. Having some form of executive management reporting, in case we need to present it to the board, would be helpful. The current reports are simply too plain for that.
I have been using Carbon Black App Control for two years.
Stability-wise, this is a great solution.
This product is very scalable. One time, we had to increase the memory in the server. Otherwise, it is very scalable and works well.
We are planning to increase usage to cover our entire ATM infrastructure in the long-term.
The support from the vendor is not so good, so most of the time, we engage the OEM. The support provided by the manufacturer is very good.
The initial setup was straightforward because we had the assistance of the OEM while deploying it. The process was not complex at all.
Our deployment took more than four months because we have to do an event analysis on a daily basis. We also have a large number of assets.
The OEM assisted us during our deployment, and there were five people involved including our side. Our side included the server owners, somebody from infrastructure, and the compliance team.
We have a team of three people who take care of the maintenance. Only my team, handling security, regularly uses the product. We did give view-only access to the compliance team, as well.
This is a good system that delivers on its proposed value.
We pay a fee for support, which is renewed annually.
My advice to anybody who is considering Carbon Black App Control is that it is a good solution, and probably one of the best application whitelisting solutions in the industry. However, you need to have a very scalable infrastructure for it. I would suggest using a virtual environment rather than an on-premies one, where you can scale as much as you need to.
Overall, it delivers well on the proposed value and my only complaint is about the reporting.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
We use Carbon Black to protect our customers against security threats and attacks. We examine all of the issues in the customers' environment and determine whether they are real threats or false positives.
I use the console to check for threats and I find it to be very user-friendly.
I would like to see the addition of some more features that are in other, similar solutions.
We have been using CB Protection for between one and two years.
This is a stable solution and it is used on a daily basis.
I find Carbon Black easy to scale. Our customers are medium and large companies and we have approximately ten people who work with it.
The technical support is good. We sometimes have to open tickets for our customers and the response is very fast. Normally, they help us to solve problems quickly.
When I search online for solutions to problems that I encounter, I have always found good documentation.
My colleague performed the setup.
The pricing for this product is competitive and our customers who told us that often, Carbon Back is the cheaper solution.
Overall, this is a good product and one that I recommend.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
My primary use case for this solution is to have an application wide listing solution. It's primarily to prevent unauthorized or unapproved applications from running on a user location.
If any malicious activity, like VAT viruses, anything RNE, ZOD malware, or something similar comes in we know that unless we approve it, it's going to be blocked.
It won't let anything in that is not approved. We would need to manually approve it. It offers a sense of security where anything that comes in, regardless of what it is, unless you approve it manually, it's not going to run.
There are a lot of false positives where it comes to stuff like the operating system itself, like Microsoft. At first, there was no standard of false positive, that it blocks a lot of store apps and a lot of new processes.
Another issue is that even sometimes if you approve, for example, Adobe as a publisher, you say any product or anything that's from Adobe has to run. It generally runs, but especially in a large environment and with a lot of users, sometimes, due to some certification validation issues or some other issue, it might stop the process from running. Genuine processes like Adobe and Chrome can get blocked, so that needs to be improved.
I would like for them to develop proper support for Mac OS because currently the Mac OS does not have all the features and it's a bit of a hassle. I'd like to see better support and better integration of the product with Mac OS.
Stability is good.
Scalability is good. We have 2,500 users. You need a few staff for maintenance. Once you've set it up and it's fairly stable you just need a couple of people to go through and look at issues and user complaints. We're using it pretty extensively compared to other solutions.
Their technical support is very good.
Initially, if it's a new company, the initial setup is straightforward, but if you're running a lot of applications it requires a lot of profiling or fingerprinting.
When I joined the company it was already integrated but from what I understand it took three to six months to implement.
The entry security level that we have where we don't have to invest in other heavy products for endpoint is some ROI that we see from having this solution.
Pricing could be a bit lower. The new players that we have in the market can do both antivirus, anti-malware, and also application wide listings within the app. Suppliers will have to be competitive moving forward.
You need the technical skills, the know-how, and also you have to be on the product. You might lose a lot of time if genuine files are blocked. Look at the problem, look at the log, then actually try to solve it for users.
I would rate this solution a seven and a half out of ten.
