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

Blackberry Dynamics Apps vs Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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 Dynamics Apps
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
78th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Blackberry Dynamics Apps is 0.0%, down from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.0%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Sukkanta Banerjee - PeerSpot reviewer
A way for users to manage their credentials on the go using a stable, and scalable app
I give the solution an eight out of ten. It's hard to comment on the number of users because the feature is completely for corporate employees who have Blackberry devices, so it's hard to track how many users there are. I advise making your decision to use the solution based on the usage in the company or the demand of the business, which you are running based on the demand.
Chad Kliewer - PeerSpot reviewer
We can make more informed decisions on whether an action is malicious
The ease of use and dashboards are improving. We came in at a time when they were developing a new dashboard screen. Therefore, we have had some confusing times between the old and new dashboards. Knowing how the new one works, I have seen vast improvements with it. While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper. They are improving on this because I have seen some improvements in the user interface that helps with this. Part of it was moving two different screens into one, merging the two together. It is very good, but it is very technically detailed and would be harder for an entry-level person to decipher. However, improvements are being made. It leverages indicators of behavior to help us remediate faster against attacks. Sometimes, I wish there was more detail on why they consider it malicious.

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 very easy to set up."
"The mail is without a doubt the most valuable."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The solution is efficient."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
 

Cons

"The solution can be improved by adding more features in which the content could be synced."
"The user interface could be improved. It was clunky at times."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on."
"I feel it is a shame that I cannot create groups of groups with inheritance."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We had a licensing package of $500,000 for three years."
"I am not able to remember the amount, but users have to subscribe for a certain amount, so once they subscribe, the amount gets sent."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"The pricing is manageable."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
848,396 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
We use it to improve detection in the whole industrial sector. We are a big energy company. Across multiple endpoints, we deploy the EDR to secure all, improve detection, and also attempt to automa...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Find out what your peers are saying about Blackberry Dynamics Apps vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,396 professionals have used our research since 2012.