We compared Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Cybereason offers both manual and automated setup options with varying deployment times, while Carbon Black has a straightforward setup process that might pose challenges for some users. Cybereason provides a user-friendly interface and highly regarded support, whereas Carbon Black offers advanced functionalities like continuous monitoring of logs and integration with other security tools. However, Cybereason is criticized for resource consumption and needs improvement in reporting features, while Carbon Black requires better node management and enhancements in GUI and troubleshooting. Cybereason is considered manageable and cheaper compared to larger competitors in terms of pricing, while Carbon Black is generally pricier.
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"I like the historical features, interface, and integration."
"The solution is very useful and easy to handle. You don't need much intervention with this product."
"Once the solution is installed and configured correctly it does not require a lot of hands-on attention until you need upgrading."
"I feel that the initial setup was straightforward and not complex."
"The solution has a very nice API on the back end for remoting into a system and executing scripts or utilizing self automation."
"It is a very complete platform."
"It gives you all of the information in a short and sweet fashion."
"For Carbon Black Endpoint, the possibility of integration with different other software's log servers is the important thing. Having just one point of view is more interesting so you don't need to go to different places to see all the information."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The support needs improvement."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"The application control can be improved. It should also have an automatic update of the agents."
"The support is poor."
"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."
"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 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 would like to see improvements made so that we can better see all of the processes."
"It would be a better solution if Carbon Black Cb Defense had an on-promise solution and a virus auto delete or quarantine."
"The node management could be much better. The one thing that they cannot do very easily is change the tenant from a backend."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 44th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 61 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Carbon Black Endpoint writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Darktrace, whereas VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
