Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Deep Instinct Prevention Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 12, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.2%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Sooraj Makkancherrry - PeerSpot reviewer
Doesn't have daily updates, which is important for healthcare IT
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable. It's a very good and new technology as a tool and antivirus. But sometimes, it doesn't work properly with our medical devices and products, quarantining files it shouldn't even after we add them to exclusions. This is tricky for us.
Elena Yau - PeerSpot reviewer
Prevention, in advance, saves us remediation time
We have a PHI (protected health information) committee, and some of the things that we review on a weekly basis are incidents. For example, if there was malware or adware or some kind of phishing attempt, or even ransomware, we would have to investigate and see if there was any PHI impact. We've seen small things because some kind of adware made its way through the browser from some malicious link, and it's really hard to prevent those. We're putting more levels of filtering around that. There are some product development ideas that we have been working on alongside the DI team, and they've been super helpful. There are definitely a lot more little areas of improvement for the interface. Also, we have talked with the DI team about adding the forensic piece, which is what we do a lot. That would be added value and they've just recently provided more individuals to think about the roadmap. That's part of their strategy and one of the good features that they want to bring on. Hopefully, they can bring that to fruition and that will ease our workflow a little bit more. The additional predictive and prevention capabilities in the 3.0 version, that don't require special rules and configuration, help our organization. The only caveat is that when things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background, if it is doing some kind of intervention. If we need to do some forensics, we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was. We should be able to see what instigated that trigger by DI and what exactly was done. That's a missing piece. It does a good job of preventing, but then we don't know what were the symptoms of the prevention. Let's say that there was like a PowerShell block. We'll see an indicator on the dashboard and we'll look at the logs and investigate. Sometimes we find that the logs that are captured locally on the endpoint itself are not very thorough. We were coached through our training with DI that, when troubleshooting, the DI team would always ask for the logs from the endpoint. We know what we need to do to look at something. But the logging for DI doesn't capture everything. There are some things that are missing. When it comes to root-cause analysis, or kill-chain analysis, and figuring out exactly what happened, it's very hard to do that right now on the product. I have used Carbon Black before and they're pretty good with the forensic analysis. That does save some efforts of my one engineer and myself when we have to go through the PHI committee. Right now, with Di, that feels like a blind spot. Another area for development is making the license clean-up a little bit easier. We always have to manually uninstall agents. If there were some way to remove the licensing and do better license management on the platform, that would help my team as well.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution is easy to deploy."
"One of the best features of the solution is that it's easy to deploy."
"The deployment of updates is easy."
"The solution runs in the background, and I do not need to care about it."
"What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system."
"We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting."
"We chose the solution because it doesn't have daily updates, which is important for us in healthcare IT, where network usage and connectivity to hospitals matter."
"The most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT is the support."
"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"The detection rate is very high. In all the testing with around 20 partners in different environments, quite a lot of them had installed with other anti-malware applications, like Sophos. This software can co-exist with those applications in the same machine. This is impressive."
"I really like the behavioral analysis feature, because it looks at all the different things, like arbitrary shellcode and reflective DLL. It looks at a lot of things that threat actors use as threat vectors to get into the environment."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The CPU consumption is low compared to what I have been using in my current environment, which is Sophos. The footprint is a lot smaller, about a quarter of Sophos. It is very small."
"Its false positives are very low, because the behavior analysis engine double checks them."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"It's just a single agent that has everything in it... With the EDR solutions, you have to install it, then you have another service history installed, and you have behavioral analytics, etc. With this, everything is in a single small "box," a small agent that has pretty much got everything."
 

Cons

"The solution’s technical support could be improved."
"The company that sells us the licenses sometimes doesn't know how to do certain things."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features."
"While you are working, you are finding these things that were supposed to be waived have come back to being blocked. That's frustrating."
"I'd like them to do software distribution too, but they said that that's architecturally not at the product line."
"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."
"CylancePROTECT's dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"The interface on the endpoint could be a little more descriptive and more valuable. It doesn't always tell you the data you need to see. Improvement there would be very helpful."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"I would like a little more training for the admins."
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"​Shop around for sure and be assured the price you pay will be close to other solutions available, but even at a slight mark-up from the other solutions, you are getting real endpoint protection versus nothing more than a cheap security blanket that might keep you warm at night."
"The monthly fee is $55 USD per user."
"The tool is not that expensive."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"The solution provides me with competitive pricing."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"CylancePROTECT's pricing is reasonable, at about €18 per user, per year."
"The license price for this solution could be better. It's on the expensive side."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"In comparison to the other products out there, it's exceptionally competitively priced. When you consider the lower administrative overhead that it facilitates, it's an absolute value."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
839,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
7%
University
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Blackberry Protect?
It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessary actions.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Blackberry Protect?
The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Blackberry Protect?
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immedi...
What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in th...
 

Also Known As

Blackberry Protect
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
839,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.