Cynet Reviews

It is like an antivirus. Cynet agent is installed on our PCs, and we are using its latest version.

If some unusual activity happens on the network, such as I open administrator sessions in a short duration of an hour on many computers in the lab, it sends me an alert about my network saying that one user opened three, four, or five sessions in one hour. Similarly, if I try to play with the disk size on a computer, it will send me an alert, and it will also stop the operation.

Sometimes, it is necessary for me to make important changes to a hard drive of a computer, and because Cynet does not allow me to do that, I have to go to the console and remove the computer from the security group just for Cynet. After that, I have to wait for 10 or 15 minutes for that to take effect. I would like to be able to disable Cynet locally. I shouldn’t have to go to the console to find the PC and then take it out of the group and then add it again to the group. I should locally be able to disable Cynet on a computer with a password or something like that, but it is currently not possible.

I have been using this solution for about two years.

It is stable. A user can't see anything. It all happens in the background. It is not really heavy on a system. It is discrete, and a user can't feel it and uninstall it. It is pretty nice, and we like it.

It is scalable. It is used on all computers. We have about 150 PCs.

We used Symantec previously. I like Cynet more. It demands fewer resources. It is not resource-intensive.

It was easy. Most of the agents were installed automatically, but on some of the computers, the agents were installed manually. I had to configure group policies, and in the console, I had to put all the agents in a group.

I take care of its maintenance. It is really simple. When I put the new computer in a domain, it installs by itself and assigns a Group Policy Object (GPO).

I'm not dealing directly with Cynet in terms of administration. There is a security company between me and Cynet. They do cloud administration. I just add the agents in the right groups on the console, but the alerts are sent to me by this intermediate company. It is very simple for me. They just send me alerts on this computer saying that something is wrong with this service and if I can check it. I don't manage it, and we're paying for managing it.

We have definitely seen an ROI because we have very sensitive information, and we never had any viruses. It will be almost two years in autumn, and we never had any viruses.

It costs 18,000 per year, but we have the whole package with not only Cynet but also the Perception Point for emails. There are also some small security courses for our users.

It is an excellent product. I would rate it 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.

The dashboard is beautiful, overall easy of use, and the UBA and NBA features are valued. Additionally, the ransomware upgrade provided us with 100% protection.

Compliance reports need to improve. However, I think they might be releasing this in an upcoming update. More report customization is also needed. 

I have been using the solution for approximately two years.

The adoption of Cynet came because it is easy to use. If you look at all other products such as McAfee and Symantec, they have different threat protections which are on the market. McAfee, requires almost three to four servers, to have a similar setup running as this solution. Integration is quite complex when it comes to other solutions. You have four to five components in your network which interact with each other. If one of the servers fails, the interaction would fail, and the threat would not be stopped. With Cynet it works better because it is on a micro-attack framework. If you understand how a system can be affected by a normal virus, worm, or related threat, you would understand.

The solution is stable.

It is scalable, there are 40 people using the product. We have also provided approximately 8000 licenses to our customers. Our customers range in size from small to enterprise companies.

The technical support is good even though their support is from outside of India.

We have used McAfee, Symantec, and Trend Micro in the past.

The setup is simple.

The implementation is not complex and you do not have to do complex integration. Get an agent and load it on to a system and you are protected.

The price should not be less than $100 which is quite reasonable for this solution because you are getting multiple components. It is not a single piece of software. You get the UBA, NBA, threat detection, memory scanners, etc. They have added a few more related features as well. In other products, if you want to find out the threat, you need to access the port. The dashboard is very beautiful because it provides everything on a centralized console. 

In the near future, they are doing a lot of upgrades and you will find an altogether separate product.

I rate Cynet a seven out of ten.

Our primary use cases with Cynet are to secure our workstations, to react to some kinds of threats from malware and hostile environments, and to maintain proper activity of our users' functionality.

Generally, we create the security path which provides the security monitoring of the different points in our infrastructure and our processes. At the end of this path are the workstations, and Cynet is the last point at which we can see proper activity and it helps us check this. In some cases, it is at the end of the path and in other cases at the beginning. We monitor situations like when somebody is receiving emails and uploads some files on the workstation and executes these files. Cynet helps us check this, to see these threats on the workstation, and react in a proper way. In some cases, it help people who council the communication with other host teams in our network. We use it for the reaction and remediation of the end practice.

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.

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. We don't have information for everything which should be generated by this product. I am referring to the functionality and accuracy of the product. 

We know that this product is probably not on the higher end of available products because the price of the product is lower than some competitors. We are sure that the functionality is also limited. But in some cases, the information is different. Ours generated from some hostile activity on the workstation is not enough information about the incident provided. The visibility and the explanation of an incident which happens on a workstation should be extended.

I have been using Cynet for less than three years.

In terms of stability, if we configure the functionality of the product, there are no breakdowns or anything like that. So the stability is quite good.

I don't think that I can determine the scalability because we had it installed for a dedicated number of endpoints and it has been the same for the whole three years. Generally, it's enough for us and we don't require a bigger scalability to extend it for the next part of the stations.

We have a contract with the support and it's quite good.

Cynet is quite easy to use, including the initial configuration installation. Its ease of use is one of the pros of this product.

The cost is rather reasonable.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Cynet a six.

To raise the score, it requires better accuracy in covering all required or all available current threats.

Maybe there is more information related to this which generates that information.

My general advice, which is not connected directly to Cynet, is that the products which somebody would want to use depends on their requirements. There are different requirements for installing such types of products and everyone should conduct many tests before their final decision. They should compare the different products and based on this should make the final decision.

We are system integrators for Cynet and we also use this solution ourselves.

We are using almost all of the features and we find it quite good overall.

I would like to see support for mobile protection and some additional reports included.

We have been using Cynet for about seven months.

This product is quite stable.

This is a scalable solution.

The technical support has been excellent. We provide support to our customers and we get support directly from the vendor.

The initial setup is quite easy compared to other products.

Everything is included in this one solution and the pricing is pretty competitive.

Nobody else offers you emergency management or video analysis, and there is a roadmap of features that are coming soon.

This is one of the best technologies that we have had available in many years and it is a solution that I recommend. It is an antivirus solution but it is much more than that.

I would rate this solution a nine 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.

The feature I find most valuable is the reality graphical user interface, which I think is really different from the others on the market. I also like the audit function that is included in the standard version.

Something that needs to improve is the mobile support and support for work tablet equipment. The technical support from Cynet could also be better.

I think Cynet is a stable solution. So far I didn't have any problems or issues with stability. I haven't had a possibility to check how fast Cynet can crack on a new epic selector on the market, so I do not know how quickly the solution can develop a new version.

I haven't tried to scale, so I am not sure if it is a scalable solution.

I think the technical support could be better. When I contacted them, I had to wait a week before getting an answer.

My advice to others about this solution will depend on the type of customer. Small customers don't care about whatever system they use, so my advice would be to undertake it under the control of the Cynet site because it's not necessary to adapt their own security teams who take care about security. When it comes to the efficiency of the system, we can have only one system and be more efficient not having to care about training others for security. So it seems to me that Cynet is really good enough for many customers. 

In the next version, I would like to see more support for mobile equipment. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cynet a seven.

I like that you can implement it in the managed service portfolio.

Automation could be improved, and orchestration could be added to the features.

Easier collaboration, that is, integration, with other tools would be nice as well. 

I've worked with Cynet for a year now.

It's both on-premises and on the cloud.

Technical support staff were very responsive and very helpful.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward, but you should get assistance from educated staff.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cynet at nine.