Nyotron PARANOID vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps

As of April 2019, Nyotron PARANOID is ranked 27th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 1 review vs Palo Alto Networks Traps which is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 9 reviews. The top reviewer of Nyotron PARANOID writes "Prevents harm to the OS, and gives visibility to the user and administrator". The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". Nyotron PARANOID is most compared with Cylance and CrowdStrike. Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Protection, Microsoft Windows Defender and Cylance.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Symantec, IBM, Carbon Black and others in Endpoint Protection for Business. Updated: April 2019.
332,881 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
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.

Read more »

The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service.It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application.The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical.After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent.Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about.If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies.The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind.We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for.

Read more »

Cons
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.

Read more »

I would like to see more automation with Palo Alto Networks Traps, i.e. self-key support. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously.Managing the product should be easier.There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly.There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results.Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere.Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis.They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else.There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
The price was fine.When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward.I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require.It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses.The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase.It is "expensive" and flexible.Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance.We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
332,881 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
391
Comparisons
111
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
839
Avg. Rating
8.0
Views
17,943
Comparisons
13,081
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
900
Avg. Rating
8.8
Top Comparisons
Compared 78% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Also Known As
Cyvera
Learn
Nyotron
Video Not Available
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

PARANOID is a game-changing endpoint protection solution that works seamlessly with your existing endpoint security solutions to create an almost impenetrable defense against even the most sophisticated attacks. Acting as the last line of defense – after threats bypass all perimeter and endpoint security layers – PARANOID protects your data from deletion, exfiltration, encryption, sabotage and more.

Delivering the first-ever OS-Centric Positive Security, PARANOID distinguishes between legitimate activities carried out by a program or user and threatening activities carried out by attacks.

Traps replaces legacy antivirus and secures endpoints with a multi-method prevention approach that blocks malware and exploits, both known and unknown, before they compromise endpoints such as laptops, desktops and servers.

Offer
Learn more about Nyotron PARANOID
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sample Customers
El Al AirlinesCBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Find out what your peers are saying about Symantec, IBM, Carbon Black and others in Endpoint Protection for Business. Updated: April 2019.
332,881 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business 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.

Sign Up with Email