Cynet Reviews

I have certain requirements for our customers, like they want to have visibility over their network, and they don't want multiple solutions for agent patching and protecting the endpoints. My customers want a unified solution that meets the aforementioned requirements.

We use Cynet for deception, and it helps us with our customers.

Deception is one good feature of the solution owing to which there would be no impact on the machines. Hence, I like this feature.

The solution lacks URL filtering. There is a need to have URL filtering in the solution.

My company is the partner for Cynet in India, and I have been working on the latest version of Cynet for over six months.

As for stability, Linux systems sometimes face update issues. I rate the stability of the solution an eight out of ten.

The scalability is good, but compared to other solutions, it requires some more features like URL filtering. Also, it needs more network visibility.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises. One resource can help the customers with the deployment of the network. They can use different sources like ADA and some third-party tools, and they can deploy more than a thousand systems. They do not need more resources.

We do not require technical support because we have our dedicated technical team for Cynet.

The initial setup is simple and user-friendly.

Regarding the deployment, if we can depend on Windows, then it hardly takes two to three minutes. It's a simple process that consists of inserting a package in Windows. Post that, it will take five to ten minutes, depending upon the customer and other factors.

As for the deployment process, we follow two processes. With manual deployment, you will share the package and then deploy it. The second process is sharing some scripts with an OS like Linux.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

We need one resource in our organization to deploy and maintain the solution. One can use ADA or some third-party tool for over a thousand deployments.

The licensing for Cynet is yearly. The solution pricing depends on the customer, but it is not very expensive.

I will recommend Cynet if someone wants only EDR protection. If they want any visibility over the network, then Cynet does not have enough compatibility with the network. It does not have enough visibility for all the network devices like firewalls and all.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use it for endpoint detection and response. We also use it as a next-gen antivirus.

We have its latest version.

It is our main cybersecurity solution. It is our EDR as well as our XDR solution. It is also our antivirus system. We have had a lot of benefits. When a user clicks on a wrong link or activates a wrong macro in Excel, it has been able to stop such attacks. It has saved us a lot of recovery time.

We especially like the fact that it can stop any kind of attack. Its performance is also quite fast. There is a specific UI module that also works quite well.

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.

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.

We have been using Cynet for three years.

Its performance is quite good.

They don't have any problem with scalability. They can manage 100 or 1,000 endpoints without a problem.

In our deployment, we have about 1,200 clients. We have covered all our endpoints.

We are currently using Cynet, but during this year, a lot of things can change. The new company might substitute Cynet with another solution. The new company has acquired another cybersecurity company. So, we might use another solution in the future. There is a high probability that we are going to change Cynet with an internal solution.

From a technical point of view, they have good support. We have a specific SOC service, and they are always ready to understand our situation or respond to our questions. So, their support is quite good.

Before Cynet, we had McAfee Antivirus. We changed because three years ago, we evaluated that McAfee was an old antivirus solution, whereas Cynet was a new EDR solution. It was exactly what we needed to have to improve our cybersecurity posture.

The setup is quite simple. You can have the first deployment in just two hours.

It was implemented in-house. Its maintenance involves patching. They have a new release every four months.

We have, of course, seen an ROI. The management has evaluated this solution in a good way. From the first year, everyone has evaluated its role in a good way.

It costs us 20,000 to 28,000 per year.

It is quite a complete solution. When they started three years ago, the product was not so mature. It was not so great, but last year, they added a lot of extra features. It is now complete.

Its setup is quite easy. In about two hours, you can have the first answers from your endpoint, and you can have the first understanding of your situation very quickly.

I would rate it a nine out of 10 because there is always scope for improvement.

My company is using Cynet for endpoint protection. 

Before Cynet, we didn't have a good centralized solution. We had disparate solutions from different manufacturers, so we needed a system that would keep everybody on the same platform. 

It's transparent, so it's not something where every user has to press a button to download or do the thing. It is centralized, in fact. Personally, I use Malwarebytes and other tools, which are fine for home use. Cynet is also relatively silent in terms of operation, except when it's required to act. Another advantage is the way it segregates the data. We had the opportunity to test their deception feature, and it works.

Cynet gives a few false positives. It would also be nice if Cynet added the ability to put comments on each device. I would love to be able to say, "This is a computer in the conference room. This is a computer at the Mac desk." That way, when you have an alarm, you don't have to go to a separate registry to see which device has an alert. We have offices worldwide, so sometimes having an alert inside one building is fine, but sometimes we don't know if it's coming into our office in Morocco or the US.

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. Then I would know who has access to that server registry and so on. But, on the other hand, I understand why they have not done that because they don't want to ask for private information on who is using what and what phone number.

I can see both sides. I trust Cynet, so I don't have a problem sharing that information. However, some customers may have an issue. At the end of the day, it would be a field that the customer can choose to fill or not. So if there were one feature that I would like to improve, this would be at the top of the list.

I'd like to be able to personalize the device labels so I can say, "This is the IT desk in our Montreal office. This is the IT desk in Saint-Laurent. Patrick is a salesman in Toronto who has had his computer attacked." When it's giving a warning, it isn't always providing notice to the user because it lets us decide whether it's a threat or not. So when it solves a problem automatically, I don't have to call.

But some users are sensitive. And at the very least, we need to advise them that one of their files has been encrypted because the security software thought it might be a threat. So I think it's a valid request there, which will not take a long time. I mean, Cynet is already maintaining a database of the unit. So it's just setting a field that the IT can decide to use or not use. So it's a simple implementation of a modification as they had.

Another disadvantage I have found so far is the platform has to be based on a desktop PC or server. It does not deploy on a mobile unit, like a cell phone or something like this. But for our primary requirements, it is doing the job.

I haven't been using Cynet for very long, only about five months.

So far, Cynet has been stable. There have been few errors.

I am not concerned about scalability for the moment because we are already deploying the solution countrywide to telecom companies and offering it to 250,000 telecom resellers. We will probably respond to some RFPs in the United States as well. When we initially approached Cynet. It was at the request of a major Canadian law enforcement agency. We also provide security for various government ministers.

So I've spoken often to the personnel at high-level Canadian public safety agencies. We've gotten some good feedback about Cynet from them. I cannot go into detail, but we provide a specialized solution for public safety and can deploy Cynet in that unit. So we got a great reference from them. Not a lot of software companies can get a recommendation from a national law enforcement agency. But, of course, it was only an informal recommendation, not an official endorsement. They tried different solutions. I'm sure they are not exclusively using Cynet, or they may not be using it anymore. I have no idea. 

We have a team that specializes in public safety. The director of this Canadian law enforcement agency can give a special designation to our team that grants us access to privileged information in a case where the investigation is ongoing. I would not say our team is made up of cybersecurity experts, but we provide cybersecurity and cybersecurity video solutions. That's not cybersecurity. We offer live video services over any IP network. So we have some specialized solutions. We developed a platform. And for telecom, we deploy platforms that are big enough to serve a quarter-million users per year for some companies or resellers.

On top of that, we provide about 400 million SIM cards every year. Some of the SIM cards that we manufacture have some interesting features, especially for public safety. For example, the SIM card, not the phone, will recognize the user's video. So the SIM card access or the biometric will verify if the person is an authorized user. If they are an authorized user, they will gain access to secure applications inside the phone. That's why we have some issues with mobility because we sell a lot of SIMs in the mobility field.

Support is one of the reasons we chose Cynet. We were looking for a solution that would help us get our cybersecurity certification in Canada, and there are a lot of solutions on the market. To get a certificate, we have to have a contingency plan for when we are attacked, and our internal experts can't deal with it. So we have to know what to do and who we'll call when this happens. A subscription to Cynet ensures that a CSO-certified actor will intervene in an emergency. So Cynet has an excellent solution from a technical standpoint, but they also have a great support system that extends to the attack itself.

The complexity of Cynet's installation is average. There might not be an easier way to deploy the solution because we are incredibly paranoid, so we don't have a centralized way to install the software. Technically, we have to install it unit by unit on PC, so that's slow. You have to go there. And sometimes, it's behaving erratically when you set it up. So if I restart the installation three times on my PC, I may get three different questions at the setup time. So it could be improved.

Once you have done this and everything works, it's one of the easiest installs. Each instance takes about a minute to install when it works. So you install the software, and after that, it automatically updates itself. It does everything by itself. And it does not ask you difficult questions. It only asks you to install it in administrative mode, which is a pretty common request for security software. The only issue is that, from time to time, you technically have a USB key trying to install the software, and it's trying to scan every user's PC around there. And every time it scans, it cannot access the other computer because we have security sync. So you need to restart two or three times. Eventually, it goes through and works nicely. So if it resolved that glitch, it would be the easiest software in the world to install.

One criticism is that the online documentation does not detail too much. Maybe I was just unable to find what I was looking for, or Cynet isn't trying to give too much information to anybody other than those doing the deployment. But aside from the hangups you encounter from time to time, it's an easy software to deploy.

I rate Cynet eight out of 10. It's decent. It could be improved, but it's a complete solution for us, and they provide excellent technical support, which is a critical requirement for us. I can offer one piece of advice to Cynet that no one else will give them. Our company is based in Canada, but it sells to telecom providers worldwide. We have customers in Western Africa and North Africa where there is a potential market for Cynet. The only problem is that Cynet is known as an Israeli solution. Personally, I have no issues with the high-quality Israeli product, but some of our customers are sensitive in those markets. Suppose we had a separate version that is white label or branded for another market. In that case, we probably could sell a lot of Cynet software there because we have a unique connection with the telecom providers. 

We are already on their list of certified solutions, and we provide about 400 million telecom security solutions in that market. So this is where we are and again. We are happy with the Cynet. We probably could sell a lot — I'm talking tens or even hundreds of thousands of seats — but some of our customers are extremely sensitive. On the one hand, they appreciate the Israeli solution, but on the other, they have to respond to public pressure. 

The main use case is just dealing with flat bounced zero-day threats. Clients typically migrate to older solutions. They can catch threats better. The solution is easy to manage and protects them. That's really what most of them want. A lot of the clients I deal with them are in the SMB space. Typically, they don't have anything too robust to begin with. They're just looking for something to get them to the next step, and this solution is perfect for that.

The general flexibility of the solution is its most valuable aspect.

The product is very easy to use. Customers really appreciate that.

There's 24/7 monitoring, which is nice.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The scalability is very good. It's an acceptable product for organizations of all sizes.

The stability is great.

I can't think of anything, in particular, I would like to see changed. For our customers, it covers everything they need.

The solution just needs to keep maturing and they need to keep up with the threat landscape to ensure they're protecting clients well as time passes.

I've been dealing with the solution for about a year or so. It hasn't been too long.

The solution is very, very stable. I haven't come across any issues in that regard. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's pretty reliable.

It's very scalable. We have clients ranging from a couple of hundred users, to less than a hundred users to a couple of thousand users. It's been used at different scales and always expands to whatever the company needs. It works for all sizes of organizations.

We have over 40,000 clients, some of which may increase usage in the future.

I've dealt with their technical support and I would give them an A rating. We've been satisfied with their level of service. They respond and they are quite knowledgeable.

The initial setup isn't too complex. It's pretty easy and straightforward for the most part.

Deployment doesn't take very long. It's quick as well.

You don't need more than one or two internal people to handle the solution in terms of maintenance. The solution handles the backend support and monitors for very little money. It's all part of the package.

The pricing is quite good, compared to the competition.

We're on the cloud, so we typically are using the latest version of the solution.

We have a partnership with Cynet.

The solution isn't as well known as Carbon Black or McAfee or Symantec, however, they really have a sold product. It will save companies a lot of money in licensing costs if they give them a try.

I'd rate them ten out of ten. They're fantastic, and the pricing is great.

Our primary use case would be incident response.

Cynet has mostly helped with endpoint protection.

Its ability to revert back from a previous state is quite notable. This feature is particularly valuable because, for maintaining integrity, it can inspect the socket for any firewall modifications. In practice, it allows us to return to a previous configuration when everything was functioning correctly.

I like the integrity of the tool. 

There is room for improvement in terms of support. The support should be faster to respond. 

I have been using Cynet over a year.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. It is a very stable solution. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten for Cynet. It is very scalable. We have around five end users using this solution. 

We do plan to increase the further usage of the solution. 

The customer service and support are not very good. 

Neutral

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with one being difficult and ten being easy to set up. 

The deployment takes around an hour. 

The deployment is agent-based. You need to install agent servers, sensors, and your candidate.

You would need an IT specialist for the deployment. 

Cynet is cheaper than others, so I would rate the pricing model a two out of ten, where one is the low price, and ten is the high price. 

Cynet is a really good tool, especially for the reports and its ability to outperform other security tools. I would recommend this solution for medium and enterprise businesses. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I have limited direct contact with end-users, but as far as I know, customers use Cynet for real-time threat detection and integrate it with other solutions.

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 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.

I have been user of Cynet since 1.5 years.

I don't have direct experience with Cynet's tech support, but I assume they are good based on general feedback.

I don't have direct experience with setting up Cynet, but I believe it involves on-premises installation for certain components while the console is in the cloud.

I don't have specific information about integration capabilities or licensing costs.

I cannot personally rate the product, but in general it can be almost eight or seven. I would recommend Cynet to others, especially for integrated MDR solutions. The perceived value of Cynet lies in its effectiveness in saving customers from aggressive attacks and critical situations.

We use the product to detect email attacks, including phishing attempts and relevant vulnerabilities to our system.

The product has valuable front-end features.

There could be more customization options and detailed information provided in the reports. As a quality manager, my work profile involves implementing and ensuring compliance with ISO 27001, including detailed reports to meet internal business needs and external auditor requirements.

We have been using Cynet for three to four years.

It is a stable product.

We have 1500 Cynet users in our organization.

Perception Point is easier to use and provides more details to investigate incidents than Cynet. In comparison, Cynet doesn’t give enough information on the malicious activity to decide to block the threats.

We purchase the product’s yearly license.

I recommend Cynet for small-scale businesses and rate it an eight out of ten.

Cynet's most valuable features are laptop and server performance, internal network monitoring, and external firewall lock management.

Cynet could improve when a reverse proxy is being used to connect to the servers. There could be an easier configuration because it is not plug-and-play. 

If I compare Cynet with Trend Micro, DDI, and DDA. Cynet does not have a deep investigation in the network. I would like to see DDI and DDA into Cynet.

I used Cynet within the last 12 months.

The stability of Cynet is very good. However, there have been some bugs but in the updates, they improve the issues.

The scalability of Cynet is good.

Technical support is offered 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The support we have received has been very good. They have English and Hebrew support.

I rate the support of Cynet a five out of ten.

I have used other solutions, such as SentinelOne, which is not a bad solution but it has too many bugs. They provide good competition against Cynet. 

The MDR internet response, in Israel, does not have any support in Hebrew. They only have support for Poland, Romania, and England.

The initial installation of Cynet is very easy because we did not do it. It's the same installation on endpoints, such as laptops, and servers, or in virtual machines.

I would rate the implementation difficulty of Cynet a three out of five.

We have the vendor do the implementation of the solution.

There is an extra cost if you want the support of Cynet.

I rate Cynet an eight out of ten.