We performed a comparison between Cynet and ThreatLocker Protect 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 ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"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."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"We are very satisfied with the level of performance we get."
"The level of automation is very good because the majority of the time, it blocks the attacks without requiring anything from our side. The technicians don't have to do anything. They are just alerted about what happened. So, the user intelligence works quite well."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the network part of it because most of the endpoint products in XDS products we find Cynet has networking user behavior analysis and network analysis, for the whole team."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that the configuration and the usage of the product are not so complicated. For people responsible for using this infrastructure for the first line of workstation monitoring, it's quite easy to use."
"Advanced detection and protection against ransomware paired with SOC monitoring are the most valuable features. They have 24/7 SOC monitoring and file activity. It is a very robust tool."
"The interface is exceptionally clear and easy to understand."
"The product has valuable front-end features."
"It can be deployed in autonomous mode, and then it automatically blocks malware threats."
"The most valuable feature is probably the ability to block programs from running. ThreatLocker has some built-in features that make it super easy. You can also contact their support within the program. If you're having issues, you can click on that button and connect with someone in five to 10 seconds."
"The most valuable feature is selective elevation, which allows elevating an individual process to admin privilege without granting admin privilege to that user, which has been by far the most useful feature outside of the overall solution itself."
"The biggest improvement has been knowing that something unauthorized isn't going to get installed on anyone’s machines."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"The interface is clean and well-organized, making it simple to navigate and find what we need."
"While it can be frustrating at times, we appreciate the low-level security provided by the application whitelist."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting has all of these features integrated into one console, making it effective."
"Using ThreatLocker is effortless because I can access it from an app on my phone, so I can help clients after hours. My client had an issue while I was at dinner, and I didn't have a tech on the problem, but I could deal with it from my phone. I can see what the client is doing and approve or deny it. It helps me deliver better service to my clients when they need it."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"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."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"There is room for improvement in terms of support. The support should be faster to respond."
"The inability to add contact information inside the Cynet is also an issue because it makes things more complicated. I would like to have a simple feature to enter a contact name and number for the person taking care of that unit or that server."
"They have some things in the pipeline, we understand, and they're going to be able to support Android and all these other devices soon. The key is the devices - which is an aspect that is lacking right now. Every company has that problem, not just Cynet."
"Could have better integration with other security applications."
"Automation could be improved, and orchestration could be added to the features."
"Compliance reports need to improve."
"Management of the console could be simplified and made more user-friendly because right now it's not very easy to use."
"It is an endpoint agent, but they don't have a probe for checking the network traffic. They could improve from this point of view."
"One area I see for improvement is in the visibility of support tickets within the ThreatLocker ticketing system."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting needs to improve its user interface and overall workflow."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"Adding applications to the allowlist can sometimes feel overwhelming."
"The snapshots used in the ThreatLocker University portal are outdated snippets and have not been updated in conjunction with the portal itself."
"More visibility in the built-ins would be nice."
"We identified several areas that we would like to see improved."
Cynet is ranked 17th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 35 reviews while ThreatLocker Protect is ranked 26th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 13 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while ThreatLocker Protect is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatLocker Protect writes "Integration is simple, deployment is straightforward, and extensive well-written documentation is available online". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas ThreatLocker Protect is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress and GravityZone Business Security. See our Cynet vs. ThreatLocker Protect report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors, best Ransomware Protection 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.