Cybersecurity Engineer at a outsourcing company with 1-10 employees
Real User
2024-10-16T19:47:00Z
Oct 16, 2024
I handle the technical aspects, while my manager deals with pricing. Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations. What we are told during calls sometimes differs from what is communicated later causing frustration.
Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools. We have a few tools that would fit into that category, but then there are some that are more expensive than they need to be. ThreatLocker is definitely not one of them. It is one of the reasons why we have eliminated other tools, but ThreatLocker has not necessarily replaced them. It was because ThreatLocker and some of our other things were doing so much that we did not necessarily need them. We were able to remove that redundancy. So, its price is fair. Hopefully, they do not take this to raise their prices.
IT Analyst at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
2024-02-02T16:00:00Z
Feb 2, 2024
ThreatLocker's pricing seems justifiable. We get a lot of value for what we pay, with excellent support, the program itself, and everything related to it being top-notch. If my CTO ever suggested dropping it due to budget constraints, I'd be concerned. While I don't have access to the exact cost, even if it was around five thousand dollars annually, I'd suggest reallocating that amount from my salary to keep ThreatLocker Protect. That's how strongly I believe in the program's effectiveness.
Founder, Vice President, Chief Security Officer at Aurora InfoTech
Real User
Top 10
2023-11-28T17:19:00Z
Nov 28, 2023
Today, the term "zero-trust bubble" is used to describe the growing number of vendors offering zero-trust security solutions. However, I've observed that the IT security industry, as a whole, tends to over-hype new technologies with acronyms and buzzwords without fully understanding their implications. When I examine the current zero-trust landscape and compare it to other security bubbles like endpoint detection and response, secure access service edge, and so on, I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides.
ThreatLocker Protect offers zero-trust security, application whitelisting, and software control across endpoints. It blocks unauthorized software, manages application installations, and prevents malicious activity for enhanced cybersecurity.
ThreatLocker Protect enhances security by blocking unauthorized software and managing application installation across endpoints. Admins receive alerts for attempts to run unapproved applications, ensuring secure environments. Utilized by MSPs, MSSPs,...
I handle the technical aspects, while my manager deals with pricing. Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations. What we are told during calls sometimes differs from what is communicated later causing frustration.
Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools. We have a few tools that would fit into that category, but then there are some that are more expensive than they need to be. ThreatLocker is definitely not one of them. It is one of the reasons why we have eliminated other tools, but ThreatLocker has not necessarily replaced them. It was because ThreatLocker and some of our other things were doing so much that we did not necessarily need them. We were able to remove that redundancy. So, its price is fair. Hopefully, they do not take this to raise their prices.
The pricing is good.
ThreatLocker's pricing seems justifiable. We get a lot of value for what we pay, with excellent support, the program itself, and everything related to it being top-notch. If my CTO ever suggested dropping it due to budget constraints, I'd be concerned. While I don't have access to the exact cost, even if it was around five thousand dollars annually, I'd suggest reallocating that amount from my salary to keep ThreatLocker Protect. That's how strongly I believe in the program's effectiveness.
I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market.
Today, the term "zero-trust bubble" is used to describe the growing number of vendors offering zero-trust security solutions. However, I've observed that the IT security industry, as a whole, tends to over-hype new technologies with acronyms and buzzwords without fully understanding their implications. When I examine the current zero-trust landscape and compare it to other security bubbles like endpoint detection and response, secure access service edge, and so on, I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides.
The pricing is correct.
Pricing is a little high, however, you get what you pay for.
The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell.
Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer.
Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does.