Bitdefender Sandbox Analyzer vs Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection comparison

"The solution is useful in the event of a gray file or grayware, as there are certain files users may download of which we know little about."

"I like the fact that it works pretty well. It can be a little aggressive at times, but I'd rather have it be a little bit aggressive than not catch what it's supposed to catch. We've been running that platform for about five years, and we've not really had any viruses or malware get through. It's also easy to set up, and it's easy to manage."

"Sandbox Analyzer is easy to use. It's simple to drill down into the data. In a lot of the competing products, an extremely informed end-user can do battle with the tools provided, but in today's market, end-users have less and less time to try and keep up. The CSAW alerts come out every day, and they're huge. Adobe did a master patch last Thursday and another one a few days later."

"It is easy to use, and there is a lot of automation. So, users don't need to worry about that."

"It has a dynamic runtime engine, which gives it an advantage over Prisma that has a static engine. In Prisma, we have to do additional malware analysis, which is not required in Proofpoint."

"We propose the on-premises solution to most of our customers, for which we must provide a license, although no such request accompanies customers who want a cloud-based solution."

"It should be more secure. There should be more protection, especially for non-signature-based malware. It works fine for non-signature-based malware, but I expect it to become a bit more advanced to be able to cope with future or upcoming environments."

"It does everything we need. We haven't been able to throw anything at it that it couldn't handle."

"We would like to see the time it takes for the sandbox to analyze a file reduced from its ten or fifteen minute duration to five."

"It would be better if there were real-time alerts. The whole suite, unlike most anti-virus consoles that just ping you when there's an infection or something, for some inexplicable reason, Bitdefender doesn't do that. The most you could do is get an hourly email, or maybe if there's an outbreak that affects 30% of our machines, it sends me an email. There's no real-time alert to say, "Hey, so-and-so literally 30 seconds ago just had this happen on their machine." Real-time reporting would be a huge improvement. All in all, it's a pretty nice product, generally speaking. They do a pretty good job. They can pretty much go toe to toe with just about anybody. But it's that kind of real-time nature. I've not had occasion to use the EDR portion to actually try and do any kind of custom scripting to drill into things that are going on at the endpoints. But my understanding from reading comments of others is that it's not particularly flexible in that regard to be able to do things like that."

"We are using the TRAP console that has a Linux-based UI, which is not user-friendly. The TAP console looks very advanced. Currently, we are maintaining three different consoles, and it is sometimes hard to switch between them or try to grab the data."

"I think it's probably less expensive than something like CrowdStrike. We got a really good deal because it was literally their year-end, and they were trying to close all the sales for the week. So we bought a three-year contract from them. It roughly ended up costing me somewhere around $17 for an endpoint per year. It was really quite a nice pricing. I've talked to other folks where they got CrowdStrike, and it's like $60 for an endpoint for a year. It does, and they can be pretty aggressive if you're dealing with them directly, and I have. So no complaints there."

"You need a license to a certain extent. You need to pay for advanced features. For corporate accounts, it isn't is really a problem, but pricing is an important thing for many companies."