Cynet Reviews

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 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.

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.