BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity Reviews

We use this product as our antivirus solution.

The most valuable feature is that it's quite small, and does not consume too many system resources.

Improvements could be made on the user interface of the console. Also, right now it's just an antivirus and there's no firewall or anything. So we have to use the Windows firewall. It's a good firewall. But I think other companies have integrated products.

The solution needs better dashboards that are easier to use. Also, a better user interface. Maybe even firewall integration of some kind. It would be helpful if you could see which threats have been detected, and have more information about what is going on.

What I'm missing is a backup. In Norton, there was a backup included. In Cylance there is no backup, or at least no backup for the relevant system, programs, or software parts.

The solution is stable. It was no problem. All went quite well. There are no bugs or freezes.

Adding other computers wasn't a problem. Just send them the link and it works. We have about ten users.

Previously, we used Norton. We switched because Norton was very, very, heavy on consuming system resources. The computer itself was very, very slow and buggy. It took a lot of time for backup and things like that. 

We would just add more if there are new users, but right now you just need one license for per user.

You just have to download it from the Cylance website, so it's pretty easy. You have to be careful because if you have more firewalls you have to buy a separate product and the question is: How does it work with the firewall from a different vendor?

There should also be backup capability included.

I do, however, recommend the solution. I would rate this solution eight out of ten.

We are resellers and CylancePROTECT is one of the products that we offer to our customers.

The standard configuration is an agent that is deployed to every workstation. It protects against malware, scripting, and other threats using its built-in AI business logic.

The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background.

The dashboard is good.

There is not too much overhead, which is good because you don't want unnecessary things that just build in bulk. 

The process of whitelisting a script that you want to be able to run can be a little bit difficult, or awkward. Some enhancements to this process would be an improvement.

I have been working with CylancePROTECT for about three years.

The stability is very good.

This is a scalable product. About 600 people in our organization use it.

I have not personally been in contact with technical support. However, we do have a support ticket, the odd time, and I would say that the support is good.

The initial setup is very easy.

The management platform is in the cloud and there is an agent on each device.

We have an in-house team that deploys this product for our customers.

This cost of the license is approximately $5 USD monthly per user.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for the solution is for endpoint security. It protects your computer or any other device from any malware, APT or spyware. We are customers and I'm the security domain architect of the company. 

What is valuable to me is the protection the solution provides against unauthorized applications. It secures different entry points into the network so that instead of being outside the internet, it's actually in the network and helps to protect internally.

The user interface could be improved, it's very outdated. The solution could also do with more help actions and explanations such as what has been identified, things like that.  

I've been using this solution for four years. 

The stability of the solution is awesome. 

This is a very scalable solution and easy to deploy. We have about 2,500 users in the company which is pretty much everybody. 

I would say it's really good because I've only had to use it once. The product is really low maintenance and easy to configure. So I really haven't had to do very much.

We moved over to this solution because it was more advanced at being able to identify how the malware is going to attack or how it's going to interfere with the operating system. There are just more tools to help security at the end point.

I wasn't involved in the setup, we have an IT department that deals with that. They were replacing another solution with this and the roll out took about a year to get to all the end users. 

I would advise anyone thinking about implementing the solution to go through a testing phase and see how the solution interacts with the users and cost out the employee population of the company. I've had this experience in another company and sometimes when you roll out a new product it can really change the way users work, sometimes negatively, and it can impact the business. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

We are currently using Blackberry Protect as our main endpoint solution, for threat prevention, script control, and scanning of malware. This is the core functionality of the Protect module.

We have the Blackberry Optics, which is the AI module of Blackberry Protect. It is called Blackberry Protect Plus Optics. The Optics feature logs all of the behavior of the servers. For example, when someone runs a PowerShell script and it blocks, it will learn the behavior and knows what to do the next time another user triggers that specific functionality.

It is currently deployed on-premises but our administration dashboard is in the cloud.

The agents are installed for our servers and reporting is to the Blackberry cloud.

This is still new to us. We have explored this solution and it fulfills our requirements, in terms of live malware detection.

We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting.

When it comes to the management of the application of agents, especially for us as an IT team the dashboard is much easier to manage in the McAfee solution.

We were looking to have a multi-factor authentication with the administration dashboard to log in, because it's cloud-based. 

There is no integration with Google Authenticator and other solution providers. 

We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard.

We have been using Blackberry Protect for just less than a year.

We are two versions behind the latest one.

Definitely, Blackberry Protect is a stable product. We have not had any kind of blue screen of death or crosstabs.

It's really lightweight in terms of resource consumption as well and in terms of memory and CPU consumption, it's quite low which is very good for us for other applications.

It's a scalable solution.

We have approximately 150 people in our organization who are using it.

We are also using Microsoft Outlook to block any kind of unwanted applications, which our users try to run in the background.

The initial setup is very straightforward. You just click on the MSI and provide the key to register for it to sync to the cloud dashboard.

We have a team of seven IT resources who have an account under Blackberry administration.

We pay our license on a yearly basis and have just renewed for two years.

We have not evaluated other options. For the time being, we are very satisfied with what we have.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

There is always room for improvement. I would rate Blackberry Protect an eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used as the last line of defense for the customer. In regards to network security technologies that focus on protecting the network, the endpoint, if something gets through, someone brings it in, the endpoint protection will actually, as our last line of defense, detect it, prevent it from executing, and in some cases, actually remediate the issue. This solution is the last line of defense within your organization for events such as a breach and it also protects users.

In most cases, the solution's ability to detect in the MITRE framework and its ability to be able to detect attacks in any one of seven or eight different areas of the life cycle of an attack is very useful.

The product needs to continue to offer better alerts. In particular, around false positives. It needs to reduce them from happening.

I can't speak to the solution lacking any features per se.

In terms of reviewing the product, I've been dealing with it for about four or five years.

The stability isn't something that we measure. We're consultants and we just advise clients on if the solution is protecting them correctly or not. We don't look at stability issues.

As consultants, we don't look at scaling. It's not an aspect of the solution I can comment on.

We don't integrate or set the system up. I couldn't speak to how the deployment process happens, or how easy or hard it is. That's not an aspect of the solution we handle. We have nothing to do with implementing or managing the solution.

We don't handle the implementation process at all or advise clients on it.

We deal with a variety of other solutions in the market. It depends on which our clients are working with. We evaluate their security based on what they have. Sometimes it's Cylance, however, that's not always the case.

We're consultants. We don't have a direct relationship with Cylance. We are working with clients on security, and handle assurance-type work for them. We're not specifically working with Cylance, however, in some cases, we may be providing it from a security review standpoint. We'd look at the client and at the product and ask: Do they have it configured properly? Are they using it properly in their overall security strategy? et cetera.

We're not managing it, we're not integrating it or installing in anything in that. We just look at it from a security review or assessment standpoint and tell the customer whether or not they have it properly implemented based upon what they're trying to accomplish.

Clients may use a hybrid or a cloud deployment model and may have it on various clouds, such as AWS or Azure.

I general, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

The quick installation would be the most valuable aspect of this solution. The interface is also not too bad.

Security is an issue because they don't get Powershell. They scan the usual software and they don't scan deeper. The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting. 

Also, more speed, less RAM, and less CPU.

The solution was stable. We have just ten test users from different departments.

The solution is pretty easy to scale.

I'd rate technical support as medium, because they couldn't answer everything we asked.

We decided to switch to a different platform because we got the EDR and the scripting solution tool in one box. It was an end-point solution, so a scripting solution, plus cybersecurity.

For basic security, I would recommend Cylance. For advanced security, I wouldn't.

I would give the solution a rating of 6 out of 10.

We use CylancePROTECT for overall endpoint malware protection.

CylancePROTECT works really well with the way we work. It's flexible. It moves with people, whether you're virtual or working off-site or working here or whatever, it doesn't matter. We can manage it all in one place.

I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT.

I'd like them to do software distribution too, but they said that that's architecturally not at the product line. I'd like to see where they can push to avoid using another product to push the agents.

I have been using CylancePROTECT for almost seven years.

It's a stable solution, and I haven't seen anything bad.

CylancePROTECT's scalability seems very good. All the way from one to 100,000. We've seen it go both ways. All the way around. I've been in organizations that have had it too—they were much larger.

Technical support is very good and pretty responsive.

We used Carbon Black before and switched to CylancePROTECT because it failed.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

Our primary use case is threat analytics and log management.

It streamlines the data and makes it a lot easier to access and sift through. The solution has also helped us a lot in terms of making threats a lot more obvious with our correlation manager. I estimate it has saved us 20 percent of what was our mean time to detect and respond to threats. It has also helped increase staff productivity.

We do vulnerability detection for our product's security and Cylance allows us to make our assessments a lot more accurate.

The vulnerability management is the most valuable feature of this solution.

I would like to see a better UI in terms of sifting through more specific data and providing analytics. A little bit more would be nice.

It works really well.

We use it for really small cases. In terms of scalability, I have no opinion on it. It works on a small scale for us.

We've had pretty positive responses from technical support when we have reached out to them for assistance.

We went with this product because we were integrating a bunch of other vulnerability threat management solutions. It handles situations that the other threat management tools wouldn't find. It has worked well covering the weaker sides of the other products that we're integrating.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

We used an integrator for the deployment. Our experience with them was fine, smooth. It worked, integrating it with our VMs.

Our licensing cost for the solution is around $4,000 for six months. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

My co-worker planned out what threat tools we needed, and Cylance was one of them.

It works well and covers a good number of the bases you need covered for general cybersecurity and vulnerability management.

I would rate it a nine out of ten for great usage and really good customer service if anything goes wrong.