We performed a comparison between Cynet and ThreatLocker Protect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The setup is pretty simple."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that the configuration and the usage of the product are not so complicated. For people responsible for using this infrastructure for the first line of workstation monitoring, it's quite easy to use."
"It provides good protection from ransomware and malware attacks. It is very good as compared to other products. If any threat is there, their support is very good. They immediately respond to the users and do a follow-up. They call us and also provide email support."
"In terms of incident response, Cynet can contain attacks, offer a trial period to customers, and uninstall if not continued. The most valuable aspect is its integration capabilities, covering endpoints and network data for a comprehensive view of threats."
"I like that it is possible to use the solution to check more information about the users' devices."
"It is quite stable. I would rate the stability of the solution a nine out of ten."
"The level of automation is very good because the majority of the time, it blocks the attacks without requiring anything from our side. The technicians don't have to do anything. They are just alerted about what happened. So, the user intelligence works quite well."
"The initial setup is simple and user-friendly."
"I like the Cynet Correlator™ feature."
"Using ThreatLocker is effortless because I can access it from an app on my phone, so I can help clients after hours. My client had an issue while I was at dinner, and I didn't have a tech on the problem, but I could deal with it from my phone. I can see what the client is doing and approve or deny it. It helps me deliver better service to my clients when they need it."
"The biggest improvement has been knowing that something unauthorized isn't going to get installed on anyone’s machines."
"The great thing is that if you get a malicious email and you try to run something, ThreatLocker is not going to let it do anything. It is not going to let anything infect your network."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting has all of these features integrated into one console, making it effective."
"The interface is clean and well-organized, making it simple to navigate and find what we need."
"The sandbox functionality is fantastic."
"Application control, ring-fencing, and storage control are the most important features, followed closely by elevation."
"The most valuable feature is selective elevation, which allows elevating an individual process to admin privilege without granting admin privilege to that user, which has been by far the most useful feature outside of the overall solution itself."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The inability to add contact information inside the Cynet is also an issue because it makes things more complicated. I would like to have a simple feature to enter a contact name and number for the person taking care of that unit or that server."
"I would like to see support for mobile protection and some additional reports included."
"Compliance reports need to improve."
"I cannot provide more details about Cynet's automation features. While Cynet claims to be automated, the specifics of this automation are unclear. They claim to have a high capability to detect and block attacks, but I am cautious about companies that claim to solve every problem without limitations. It does help in identifying malware on the network but doesn't specifically identify vulnerabilities."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the usability of this product for new threats. Meaning, not everything which is new is properly seen by the product and not all the required actions are taken."
"They have automated response capability, and they're moving more and more into SOAR capability. They have built-in deception technology with host-file users, phantoms, etc. We used to call them honeypots. So, they're on target. They're doing a really good job, and they should continue to improve with SOAR."
"It is an endpoint agent, but they don't have a probe for checking the network traffic. They could improve from this point of view."
"A support center in Asia is needed."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"From a reporting perspective, enhancing the ability to customize reports would be beneficial."
"We identified several areas that we would like to see improved."
"Adding applications to the allowlist can sometimes feel overwhelming."
"If you have a thousand computers with ThreatLocker agents on them, when you approve or create a new policy saying that Adobe Reader that matches this hashtag and meets certain criteria is allowed to be installed, it applies at the top level or the organization level. It applies to every computer in the company. When you make that new policy and push it out and it goes out and updates all of the clients. Unfortunately, at this time, it does not look like they stagger the push-out."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
Cynet is ranked 17th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 35 reviews while ThreatLocker Protect is ranked 26th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 13 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while ThreatLocker Protect is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatLocker Protect writes "Integration is simple, deployment is straightforward, and extensive well-written documentation is available online". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas ThreatLocker Protect is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress and GravityZone Business Security. See our Cynet vs. ThreatLocker Protect report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors, best Ransomware Protection vendors, and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.