What advice do you have for others considering Abnormal Security?

I rate Abnormal Security 10 out of 10. If someone had doubts about Abnormal's maturity, I would reassure them that it has been rock solid in my experience. They are continuing to build more into the product all the time, and if it's missing a specific feature, then it will probably happen because it's not a static product. While some products take a long time to build, Abnormal keeps things moving. They seem to have an excellent sprint cycle, with a solid focus on constant improvement. It would depend on what specifically they are looking for. To me, it acts like a mature product compared to other systems like this that I've used in the past.

I would rate Abnormal Security nine out of ten. Minimal maintenance is required. While some may have concerns about Abnormal Security's relative newness, I'm curious what specific aspects of its youth are causing apprehension. The product is demonstrably performing well for our needs, and I'd encourage those with reservations to consider trying it firsthand. If not, I'm happy to move on from the discussion unless they're open to a hands-on evaluation. I'm always transparent about my experience with Mimecast and other solutions we explored before choosing Abnormal Security. Ultimately, as long as a product delivers results, its age shouldn't be the primary factor in our decision-making. It's worth checking the Abnormal app store for potential integrations with other platforms your organization already uses, such as Teams, Slack, Zoom, Microsoft 365, Okta, or CrowdStrike. During the proof-of-concept, if Abnormal Security identifies existing integrations with these tools, it can further enhance its functionality.

I would strongly recommend using Abnormal Security. I would rate the product as a nine out of ten. While it excels in functionality and effectively filters out bad emails, it is not a perfect ten due to identified bugs in the console and integration issues with other tools. Overall, it is a highly effective security solution.

I'm a customer. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten overall. I would advise others to get experience with Abnormal. Do the demo. The proof is in the pudding. It's one of the very few products that works exactly as it's designed to work. The quality of the output is right there. The service speaks for itself. Talk to their staff and their team and look at their metrics. Then, turn on Abnormal and see what it catches. Do a side-by-side comparison.

I'm a customer and end-user. While I understand Abnormal security can detect threats in cloud collaboration applications like Slack, Teams, and Zoom, we have not expanded into that. We've used it really only for email so far. That said, I'm very interested in that. After all, with email it's been very effective for us. If a company that's considering using Abnormal says they are concerned about it not being as mature or established as other solutions on the market, I would just tell them to do a POC. We had a remarkable POC. It's really easy to set up. You can do it in a read-only mode, and you'll get a really good idea of what the tool can or cannot do, and then you can make a good decision. I've participated in several reference calls for others in higher education who had questions about the product. I've referred multiple customers to them. It solved so many problems for me, and it allowed me to focus on more high-priority tasks. I would absolutely recommend the product. I'd rate it ten out of ten. It's one of the very few products that I would not want to be ripped out of my environment. It really does solve so many problems.

I would rate Abnormal Security nine out of ten. We have 1,000 users. The maintenance required is minimal. With its ability to utilize technology, AI, and other tools, Abnormal Security has caught up to or even surpassed its competitors that have been around for longer. I recommend conducting a proof of concept of Abnormal Security, which is very easy for customers to do and is likely to provide them with more insights.

To someone who is considering using Abnormal Security but is concerned that it is not as mature or established as other solutions, I would say that many of the new solutions that come out are much better than old solutions because they are coming at the problem from the new modern way they need to. Because Abnormal Security is 100% API-based, they are able to install it super fast and handle the solution much better and easier than the old-school way of doing things. Many times, some of the solutions that are established are still doing things the old way, and they have not kept up with the things that have changed in the cloud or things that have changed in the API or AI and ML. Abnormal Security is surely new, but the capabilities that they have are beyond what many of the current vendors are capable of. It comes down to whether you want to try and stay ahead of the curve, or you want to stay behind it and then you have the wave crash on you because you did not stay ahead of it. To those researching or evaluating this solution, I would advise doing a PoC with other solutions and seeing how long it takes to get it set up and how much email or time it reduces for your team. I do not think they are even going to be close. When you see how fast you can get Abnormal Security up and running and the novel things that they can find, that alone should make you realize that you need some of this. They do all the basics, and then they find things that nobody else can find. One of the biggest challenges that we have in the industry is the spearfishing of people who sign paychecks or move money around. If you can protect them because they have the keys to the castle, it is worth the money. Abnormal Security can detect threats in cloud collaboration applications such as Slack, Teams, and Zoom, but we are not leveraging any of that today. It would be valuable for us, especially because attacks on Teams are becoming a thing. Overall, I would rate Abnormal Security a 10 out of 10.