We performed a comparison between CylancePROTECT and Nyotron PARANOID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"You can manage all the threats and everything from a centralized dashboard."
"The solution is pretty easy to scale."
"We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features of CylancePROTECT are its powerful machine-learning capabilities and predictive intelligence."
"The solution’s AI is its most valuable feature."
"Two or three years ago when the WannaCry virus struck, the people that were on Cylance were the ones that weren't affected."
"I like the AI and mathematical components that they use."
"First of all, it does the job. It prevents harm to the operating system. Also, the visibility it gives to the user and to the administrator is very good."
"Nyotron protects your users and does not acquire any threat intelligence."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The support needs improvement."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"CylancePROTECT's dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"Additionally, their channel management has been lacking, with a notable disregard for small and medium-sized businesses, focusing primarily on large enterprises and very large MSPs."
"The product does not do a lot of reporting on what it is taking care of. Enhanced reporting would be a welcome improvement."
"The solution’s technical support could be improved."
"The solution should implement AI in the product."
"The solution needs better dashboards that are easier to use."
"The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting."
"It is hard to manage."
"The solution should be available on Linux and other platforms, including mobile platforms such as Android and iOS."
"The main feature that is missing is to have the same solution on servers. Currently it's only protecting the client side, not the server. If they would add the server in the same solution, that would be great."
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 40 reviews while Nyotron PARANOID is ranked 50th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 2 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Nyotron PARANOID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nyotron PARANOID writes "A cost-effective security solution for endpoint protection". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Nyotron PARANOID is most compared with HP Wolf Security. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Nyotron PARANOID report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.