VMware Carbon Black Endpoint Reviews

Our primary use case for this solution involves addressing incidents related to malware outbreaks and malicious signatures.

Sandboxing is one of the features I found to be the most valuable in Carbon Black CB Defense.

It would be good if Splunk integration or something similar to Splunk integration is available for this solution.

I have been using the latest version of Carbon Black CB Defense for the past year.

I am not sure whether Carbon Black CB Defense can be considered to be a stable solution or not.

I feel that this is a scalable solution. There are around 80 to 90 employees at our organization who are using Carbon Black CB Defense.

I have never contacted the tech support team of Carbon Black CB Defense.

In our organization, we have used CTF365 and iZOOlogic in the past. We didn't switch from those since we have a multiple-client setup. One client uses one EDR, while the other one uses the other EDR. So, the intention of having a multiple-client setup at our end is to help our clients, and it is not for the benefit of our company.

I feel that the initial setup was straightforward and not complex. The deployment of the tool is carried out by our engineering team, consisting of 10 members. With the addition of the manager and the other management team members, the total number of individuals involved in the deployment comes to around 25. The engineering team, who are responsible for this activity, ensures the successful deployment of the solution with their expertise.

I would like to see more integration with other platforms. I rate this solution a seven out of ten.

While there is an IR team that is responsible for managing EDR or deep analytics, our focus is on endpoint and antivirus protection. This is where we encounter signature updates. We look for false positives in their relation to file interpretation. Should anything occur, we can instantly respond. Instead of sending a sample and getting coverage, we can put a policy and place an immediate stop on the false positives.

While I consider the product to be top notch and am happy with it, its reporting aspects need to be addressed.

I would definitely recommend Carbon Black CB Defense to others who are contemplating using it, but its administration features need fine tuning. I believe this is already being addressed so that gaps can be filled as these relate to other leading technologies on the market.

The GUI and reporting should also be addressed.

We have been using Carbon Black CB Defense for the past seven to eight months.

I have not had occasion to make use of technical support, although I may have in the future, as I am the product person who is working with another experienced team and there is a process under way to migrate from McAfee to Carbon Black CB Defense. 

The initial setup was a bit difficult since we had to do it manually or through the use of a script.

The price for the solution is completely at government level, meaning one which is very high, although it is up to management to consider this criteria.

Our company has over a thousand people who utilize the product. Going forward, everything will be managed by Carbon Black CB Defense.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

Basically we use the solution for protecting and detecting misuse of end-users while using their end-points to access the internet, especially for browsing websites, or suspicious activity as far as misusing their web browser. It protects them from web-based attacks such as DDos (Denial of Service) or ransomware. 

What I find most interesting is the performance of the end-point client, as well as the capability of detecting any activity on the end-user while using their browsers to navigate the internet. 

To monitor that activity from a security standpoint, detecting cross-site scripting or SQL injection activities that might be coming out from the browser. That's a very needed feature that allows it to distribute the security across the company and not centralizing it only on the firewalls or in the intrusion detection systems. 

The solution is quite customizable.

It's easy to set up the solution.

There's lots of very useful documentation online to help troubleshoot and learn about the product.

I can't think of any feature that needs to be enhanced or reviewed at this time.

Some of the features that I see as an end-user, unfortunately, I haven't been able to see from a project management standpoint. I'm not sure if we're actually taking advantage of all the available features. I don't know if it's because we haven't configured it yet, or we are not using it. 

I'm not sure as to the logic of how we've decided to customize it. We've only really used it since February and therefore there may be more to do on that front. That's why it's hard to say if something is missing or if we just aren't utilizing it.

I've been using the solution for about a year and a half.

It's pretty stable. We haven't heard of any issues and we don't know yet about usage and security issues outside of the performance or any stabilities in the product itself. So far I would say that I consider it stable - very stable in fact.

Given the number of people that are using it, I would consider it as scalable without having specific details on the performance, on the central management, or the management points. I would say that, due to the behavior of the solution with the end-users, it's a good solution. It is scalable.

I haven't used technical support myself just yet. I've only really gone as far as looking at their documentation on their website, including the blog, user support page, and other related documentation. I would say that is good. It's enough. 

There is more than enough information for tech-savvy people, and knowledgeable people that are looking for specific things. There are details telling them how to fix certain issues related to the product, or how to manage some of the product software. I would say that the documentation and the support are okay. It's what I would use personally. I prefer either looking at the documentation myself and then calling the call center after that if it's still necessary.

We found the initial setup to be relatively straightforward. It's easy. It's not complex at all.

The time it takes to deploy depends upon the number of end-points that you are deploying. That said, as far as I know, it took us probably six to nine months. This is due to the fact that there were some other technical issues not related to the service. That was my understanding at the time.

We're just customers and end-users. We don't implement this solution for clients or anything like that.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. It might be the latest, however, I can't say for sure. We use it at a bank for our endpoints. Therefore, it's likely the latest.

There are between 20,000-30,000 people using the solution within our organization. It's definitely 20,000 at least.

I would advise others to basically set the expectations as far as the features they expect or need from a security solution. This solution can't solve problems related to security practices within the company. Internal policies must be in place. Then, figure out how to integrate this solution and its available features into your internal security protocols. 

Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been pretty happy with the product so far.

We used it for EDR, as well as endpoint protection, the whitelisting feature.

The EDR and reports were helpful in improving our organization.

The EDR was amazing. It was very responsive. It did an excellent job of providing us the information we needed in a timely fashion, as long as the latest agent was up-to-date on the client.

The whitelisting system, and the concept of it, overall, is pretty decent. The problem with the whitelisting capability is that it's pretty archaic. Based on all the security roles and the release privilege, it could take time for an application to be whitelisted and approved for use.

The Mac support needs improvement, as it had next to none.

The biggest problem we had was the Mac support. It had very little, and my C-suite is almost exclusively Mac, as is my marketing and development department.

We had used the Carbon Black CB Defense for two years. We changed to another solution approximately nine months ago.

We were using the latest version at the time.

The stability of the on-premises servers had no issues but the resource allocation on the clients was a bit high, especially with having to run two agents. The detection agent, the Whitelist, and the control agent.

We didn't have any problems scaling this solution.

It did the job. It was great for Windows, but it had no Mac support and had nothing for Linux, which makes it hard.

We had 150 users in our organization. Their roles varied from CSF departments through to my C-suite.

Technical support seemed pretty good and I didn't have any problems with it. 

If we had a problem or a question, and they would get back to us in a reasonable amount of time. 

The only place that we ran into trouble was with Macs. That's my general theme here with Carbon Black, unfortunately.

I would rate them an eight or a nine. They were good for the most part.

Previously, we were on the Kaspersky Enterprise Solution for a couple of years. It was a signature-based system. Signature-based systems are getting easier to get around by the attackers these days, so we swapped over to something that is a little closer to attack vectors, which says, don't run anything that we don't approve.

The initial setup was moderate.

For others who are interested in using Carbon Black, I would recommend checking your use case. If your use case is Linux and Mac, then it will be problematic, based on my experience.

These days, with VMware taking them over, I'm willing to bet that that's going to change.

I see some redemption in their future, with VMware owning them. VMware is a very strong player in the workspace, and especially with their workspace tool that VMware's building to work with Windows, Mac, and Linux clients, in order to do VDI.

For the Windows endpoints, it was incredibly useful, nothing got through it, which is a bad thing in some cases because we hadn't tagged the certificate platform appropriately. So, it's a bit of an improvement needed there, but the biggest complaint is around the operating systems not being available.

I would rate Carbon Black CB Defense a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as endpoint security.

The security, specifically the endpoint security that the solution provides, is its most valuable aspect.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The solution needs better overall compatibility with other products.

I've been using the solution for less than a year. I've only really been using it for the last one or two quarters of this fiscal year. It hasn't been a very long time yet.

The solution is quite stable. We find it to be a reliable product. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution can scale if you need it to. That's not a problem at all.

We have more than 10,000 people using the solution currently.

When it comes to technical support, so far it's been good. We've been pretty satisfied with their level of support. They are responsive and knowledgeable and we know we can get help when we need it.

We were not using any other product before we started using this solution. That said, we registered for other products too and finally decided to go with Carbon Black after trying out other options.

The initial setup isn't really complex. It's pretty straightforward. Those implementing the solution shouldn't have a problem getting it up and running.

The deployment only really took a few months. It was an okay process.

You need very little maintenance on the product. We have about two people here who manage it without any issues.

We're just a customer. We don't have any business affiliation with Carbon Black.

We're currently using the latest version of the solution.

Overall, I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use this solution for endpoint security and protection.

The most valuable feature is that it detects and stops malicious executables.

Admins can use the portal to obtain a command shell on an endpoint to perform further investigation.

This solution works well but needs lots of tuning and optimization.

Our primary use case is for application control.

The whole purpose of the product, like application control, is very good, and also if you need to update some policies, it works well and instantly.

I would like to see the user credentials feature improved. I would also like to see more reporting features and better ways to roll the reports out.

I have been using Carbon Black CB Defense for more than a year.

I would say the stability is high a nine on a scale of one to ten.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give it a nine for being highly scalable.

Technical support is pretty responsive. I have not had to use them a lot and when we need them we route them through our team.

The initial setup was straightforward I had some minor issues with the web application I logged in and fixed them. The initial deployment only took about half a day. We have deployed to around one hundred systems.

The deployment was done in-house.

The pricing is annually based and operates through another department than mine.

I would rate Carbon Black CB Defense an eight out of ten.

My clients are using this solution for security as their frontline defense. They are using a whitelist that has all known software allowed.

Once the solution is installed and configured correctly it does not require a lot of hands-on attention until you need upgrading.

There are many different controls that are needed to be put into place for upgrading that makes it difficult. Having to re-engineer your IT infrastructure to match their software, as opposed to having it integrate and work independently causes difficulties. When there is an update to any software everyone has to be involved.

I have been using this solution for approximately six years.

The solution has been working well, nothing stands out as an issue.

I have found this solution to be highly scalable. We have clients that are large-size companies using this solution.

The technical support was great when we used them.

I rate the technical support of Carbon Black CB Defense a nine out of ten.

The solutions provider has made great strides in the last four years making it easier to implement. However, the way their architecture is makes it difficult, the installation is quite a cumbersome process to integrate everything together.

My advice to those wanting to implement this solution is it not easy and it takes time and money.

I rate Carbon Black CB Defense a five out of ten.