I'm also familiar with Symantec, Trend Micro, SentinelOne, and FireEye.

Prior to implementing CrowdStrike, we used BlackBerry Cylance. We switched for the ability to have full remediation so that we didn't have to do it ourselves. Also, this product is pretty much best-in-class for endpoint protection.

The only real difference that we have found with CrowdStrike, compared to Cylance, is that we no longer have to spend time remediating our issues. The detection and prevention capabilities are similar, although, with CrowdStrike, we have fewer false positives.

This was the first product that we evaluated out of 6 (six) products.

One factor behind why we chose CrowdStrike is that we were getting rid of multiple agents to go to one CrowdStrike agent. When we had Carbon Black Protection previously, they were ripping us off. It was a lot. We are paying substantially less with CrowdStrike. Carbon Black Protection is only for application whitelisting, and that is all it does. It is not AV. It is not anything else. That was just one piece of software that we were using. So, getting rid of Carbon Black Protection more than paid for CrowdStrike, and then some.

We were also previously using Microsoft SCEP.

I've worked with Kaspersky. They are a similar solution. I've also used Microsoft Defender, which is also very similar. We do use a lot of Microsoft products, and Defender is readily available everywhere. They are the market leaders right now. Their software has very good integration across the whole Microsoft product offering. CrowdStrike, however, we have high trust with, as they are focused specifically on security, unlike Microsoft. CrowdStrike offers updates quicker than Microsoft or other services. 

I have used Symantec and Rapid7.

This solution has been not nearly as compute resource heavy as some of our previous solutions. Compared to our previous solution, CrowdStrike is a lot easier to use, easier to get information out of it, and you are getting it in more real-time.

I was a McAfee customer for 20 years before switching. It was like night and day, where McAfee is old technology, and CrowdStrike Falcon is new technology. On a scale of one to 10, McAfee is at one and CrowdStrike Falcon is at 10. There is a really big difference.

We came from an on-premises solution. With more people working remotely, that became an issue. The fact that this is a cloud-native solution provides us with flexibility and always-on protection.

I'm working on two projects. One is using CrowdStrike Falcon and the other is using Crowdstrike XDR, which is the advanced version.

We worked with other solutions, like Trend Micro. CrowdStrike's advantage is that the agent is light, so it doesn't require many resources on the machines. It's easy to install, and the results are useful to the organization.

We implemented CrowdStrike Falcon in response to a security incident. It was the first endpoint detection and response service we had ever used, and we've been utilizing it since 2021.

We were previously using Symantec. CrowdStrike has a wider range of features and has been the market leader in its category. After a quick POC, we decided to move to it. 

We previously used both Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response but found that they lacked the 24/7/365 monitoring and response offered by CrowdStrike Falcon. Additionally, their detection capabilities, particularly for ransomware and zero-day attacks, were not as effective.

Prior to CrowdStrike, we used Carbon Black Threat Hunter.

There is a huge difference between the two products. CrowdStrike is quiet. I think that Carbon Black Threat Hunter just locks everything that has to do with the endpoint. You generate a lot of noise, but it means nothing. Whereas CrowdStrike is more about real threats and we haven't seen much from it.

On the other hand, with Carbon Black Threat Hunter, we were able to deploy pretty fast and we could uninstall agents pretty quickly from the dashboard.

I had originally heard about CrowdStrike Falcon from my peers. A lot of CSOs that I have roundtable discussions with speak highly about it.

Prior to Falcon, we were using Webroot.

The primary improvement that we have seen is visibility. We had no visibility into what happened before, during, and after a situation with Webroot, but with CrowdStrike, we have that visibility, which allows our team to make educated decisions. In terms of detection and prevention, I believe it's all experiential so far. Falcon has been very good at both detection and remediation for any issue that has come up.

We were previously using McAfee.

CrowdStrike seems to detect quite a bit more than McAfee did. We like how it is kind of real-time, if you will. It is not so much signature-based. So, it has been able to stop things quicker than McAfee did. We have seen a huge increase in performance on our systems. Oftentimes, the daily scans would need to be run with signature-based AV or scans with servers, then that would cause great performance hits. It kind of limited us as well to where we could only scan certain windows. Now that we have CrowdStrike, we are kind of always-on and not limited to having to do those scans. So, that has been a big performance increase for us.

It is a lot easier to use CrowdStrike than McAfee, especially having the team at CrowdStrike handle the maintenance day-to-day, etc. With on-prem, you are responsible for everything. Whereas, with CrowdStrike, we can just worry about our IR response, basic deployment, and health checks. So, it is very convenient having them handle it in the cloud.

CrowdStrike was cutting edge technology at the time. EDR was still kind of new then versus the traditional AV. Not only because of licensing costs, but also because of performance, we felt that we needed something new.

Prior to Falcon, we were using Symantec antivirus. It was out of date, which is why we replaced it.

We previously used other solutions such as Setinel One.

We previously used Symantec and Kaspersky. 

We previously used security solutions from Symantec, Trend Micro, Trellix, and Mandiant. However, CrowdStrike Falcon stood out as a more premium offering. Its advanced capabilities and comprehensive approach to security ultimately led us to switch providers after careful consideration of several factors.

We replaced Symantec Endpoint Protection. On the one hand, we wanted a fully NGAV. Symantec was still using a hybrid model, a mix of signature-based and behavioral-based detections, so moving over into a full NGAV product was important to us. We wanted to stay up to date on the ever changing nature of malware, especially since we have been seeing more malware nowadays that can evade strictly detection-based systems. Also, Symantec support was very hard to track down or talk to. All in all, CrowdStrike has been more responsive to any questions or concerns, which is big when you are dealing with vendor solutions.

Fortunately, we have not experienced any major detections. However, testing-wise, CrowdStrike has been more effective overall.

I work with multiple vendors, not only CrowdStrike, in the endpoint space, and the CrowdStrike UI is better than others. The response of CrowdStrike is better than other vendors.

We made the switch from Symantec to Falcon because we required a solution that offered greater speed, reliability, and the ability to effectively handle the wide range of advanced threats present in the wild.

Previously, I used Microsoft Bitdefender, but CrowdStrike was faster and better protection-wise.

Previous to CrowdStrike, our organization was using McAfee VSE with McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator (ePO). Switching from McAfee to CrowdStrike, we saw a reduction in resources being used on both the workstations and servers. We saw an increase in detections, be that good or bad. We would like to think it was a good thing, because now it is finding a lot more stuff that wasn't strictly signature-based. So, it provided almost a very lightweight SIEM-type of response. It was providing information about installed applications, account lockouts, and top console users. It was a very nice bonus to have that information in addition to just the general overall anti-malware that CrowdStrike is known for.

CrowdStrike is so much easier to use. The UI is far more intuitive. The breakout of how the policies as well as the organizational structure within the UI for how the computers are laid out is far more intuitive. It feels a lot more based around how AD kind of functions. Because I am already familiar with Active Directory, the move to using that in CrowdStrike is very seamless, at least in my mind.

The agent is far more lightweight than our previous antivirus solution. It is a lot less resource intensive. We don't have any more on-prem servers to manage for running the application, which is another benefit to being in the cloud. There are just a couple of holes punched in the firewall for communication in and out.

A lot of the switch was focused around the fact that CrowdStrike was solely a cloud-native solution as well as heuristics versus signature.

Originally, we had Webroot. We used to get, every so often, a slew of viruses that would get through the cracks. I don't know if Webroot's definition didn't get updated in a timely manner or if they were just delayed in something, however, whatever it was, we used to get that intrusion quite a bit. Then we would patch it and we would have to remediate everything. It wasn't ideal. 

We were looking for a product that would be more proactive than a reactive solution, and after doing a bunch of research, we decided on CrowdStrike. 

I have worked on many other IDS solutions, but I found CrowdStrike Falcon to be the best.

I have used other solutions before CrowdStrike Falcon, such as Symantec.

Symantec does not have any advantage over CrowdStrike.

I previously used McAfee but zero-day threats are not being protected. We evaluate CrowdStrike Falcon and when compared to McAfee, it was far better. 

Our previous endpoint protection platform was very cumbersome to manage. It did not reliably apply protection and had many issues. My current organization is the fourth time that I have deployed CrowdStrike Falcon in an environment. The first time that we deployed it, we were using an inherently cloud-native protection platform, but it was unreliable. 

Swagelok was using McAfee ePO, which inherently is an on-premise solution. It is also very unreliable and cumbersome to manage. It was just missing detections, being inherently signature-based. So, it was only hitting on known signature-based malware. We lacked the EDR aspect of endpoint protection, e.g., behavioral-based analytics and preventing malicious behavior before it begins, which drastically stifles the remediation effort. McAfee's principle was always, "If you get said detection, then you need to run other tools to scan, remediate, and clean up the endpoint." Hands need to be on the endpoint taking it physically offline and off the network. Everything is drastically simplified with CrowdStrike Falcon. I can cloud sandbox the endpoint, remediate it, and interact with it at the command line level remotely, regardless of where it is, as long as it has an Internet connection. It is just amazing. 

As far as Swagelok goes, McAfee yielded a lot of false positives. The management was so cumbersome that there were only a handful of people able to resolve problems with endpoints or false detections. If you weren't connected to the inside core network, you couldn't reach the server in order to mitigate the problem. Because of the cloud-native aspect to CrowdStrike Falcon, I can pull up the console in my car on a mobile phone and mitigate an issue for someone whenever and wherever I need to do it, regardless of how I am connected, what device I am on, etc. So, the response time has drastically decreased (by five to 10 times) for remediating a critical vulnerability, a piece of malware, or undoing a false positive. This has been noticed across the company at large.

I have experience with Symantec endpoint protection. As compared to Symantec, CrowdStrike is a very good product. I have also worked with Microsoft Defender.

We were using another antivirus previously. However, it was heavier. We liked how this solution used much fewer resources and the fact that we didn't need to update our machines. 

I'm also working with Bitdefender. 

I switched companies. My previous company was using Crowdstrike and my new one is on Bitdefender. It uses multiple Bitdefender products.

We were previously using Symantec and we switched to CrowdStrike Falcon.

Before Falcon, we used Trellix. We switched to Falcon for enhanced security, moving beyond just antivirus protection. Falcon provides more advanced features and a comprehensive security solution.

Previously, we utilized Carbon Black for our endpoint security needs. However, we transitioned to CrowdStrike for several compelling reasons. As a prominent market competitor with widespread adoption among organizations, CrowdStrike offered a robust platform capable of meeting our evolving security requirements.

The 2021 incident further underscored the importance of robust security tools. CrowdStrike's capabilities proved invaluable in navigating the aftermath and instilled confidence in its continued effectiveness for future challenges.

Beyond its proven track record, CrowdStrike seamlessly integrates with our existing security ecosystem. The platform's comprehensive feature set simplifies endpoint management from a centralized console. Additionally, its granular telemetry across various modules provides invaluable insights during incident detection, enabling us to gather holistic information from each affected machine.

Furthermore, CrowdStrike consolidates our security stack by encompassing next-generation firewalls, endpoint detection and response, and real-time endpoint scanning, eliminating the need for separate solutions like McAfee. This streamlined approach enhances operational efficiency and simplifies security management.

We had multiple other antiviruses, including Norton, Avast, and Defender. We chose Falcon due to its Arctic Wolf integration. 

We follow trends to make sure we have the best product for our organizations. The one we were using fell behind a bit. We wanted something that was completely cloud-based so that the infrastructure wasn't on-prem and we wouldn't be required to manage the upgrades of servers and applications. 

Prior to CrowdSrike, we used a signature-based solution from Symantec.

We previously used Cisco AMP.

We are an MSP and have used and provided IBM QRadar, Bit Defender, and CrowdStrike Falcon based on each client's requirements. 

CrowdStrike Falcon is the most popular choice for our clients because of its price.

I previously used an anti-virus solution, but it didn't do all the things I needed regarding endpoint protection. That's why I added the CrowdStrike Falcon piece to the puzzle. I still have the anti-virus running. I don't need it technically, but I still have it running.

I had Bitdefender for three years before switching to this solution.

They were fine. I didn't have a lot of problems, but I'd been hit with ransomware four times while I had Bitdefender. I considered that as kind of a sign that maybe we should change things up.

The malware, as far as uninstalling, wasn't triggering the antivirus. I wanted something a little more advanced, due to the fact that the Ransomware protection just really wasn't there. The anti-virus aspect was pretty good. The email protection was pretty good, as well.

We previously used VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. CrowdStrike Falcon is more of an EDR solution.

Yes, we previously used Kaspersky.

We previously used another solution and we switched to CrowdStrike Falcon because it was superior.

We were in the old McAfee EPO and with all the ransomware and all that stuff hitting us, we found that McAfee wasn't really cutting it. That's why we switched.

We did previously use a different solution. The security team made the decision to switch. It wasn't a decision from an operations standpoint. 

We had a Vipre solution, but it was an On-Prem solution. The server was aging out and the software was up for renewal. It wasn't working well with our remote workers; they're not literally connected to my network so updating them was always a pain-point without a cloud-based solution.

We were going to transition to "cloud" and Vipre just wasn't really up to the level of CrowdStrike at the time.

CrowdStrike was already in place before I arrived, at both places where I have used it.

We were also using Carbon Black, as well as other tools, but they were not being used to the same degree. I think that we were using Carbon Black for white-listing applications.

I also spent a lot of time using Nessus, which is a vulnerability scanner. I would look at scans to see what kind of vulnerabilities were present, and patch management updates with other teams.

We've used different solutions in the past. It really depends on the environment. That typically dictates which solution we would implement. We use, for example, McAfee as well. I personally have worked with Amnesia.

When it comes to Amnesia, initially I was able to employ them on my on-premise machine. I have installed Falcon on the cloud and infrastructure, however, I haven't dealt with the on-premise deployment. 

You can use Amnesia with McAfee. Apart from that you also have a provision for signing with McAfee and using their host software and the server software and their media solution and placing those onto an on-premise machine or onto a particular server and you would have the ability to administrate from there. That's more for a company that is into privacy and doesn't want to share their data on a cloud.

We were using Symantec products, which were Symantec EndPoint Four and Five. We found that the latest modules needed additional tools to protect us. There were multiple tools needed at various levels. There was complexity in increasing users on this platform. It also took a more traditional approach to security, and we were looking for something more advanced that had advanced AI and ML capability.

We evaluated CrowdStrike and we found it satisfactory in our environment. Therefore, we decided to change to it from Symantec.

We were previously using FireEye EDR. We switched to Crowdstrike Falcon XDR because we were facing a lot of issues, such as false positives.

We previously used a Symantec product, but there was no local vendor support so we switched to CrowdStrike Falcon. 

We had Vipre business on-premise, the product was being discontinued and I wanted to move away from an on-premise solution.  At the time Vipre did not seem to be quite as mature as other options.  I understand that they have improved quite a bit since I looked at them last.

We just moved over from McAfee to CrowdStrike, which detected a lot of things that McAfee did not. We detected a malicious code on our on-premise system, even though we are migrating our application to the cloud. It was able to detect it right away to send us what the code had tried change and execute. 

Our company decided to make the switch between the two products, and I have seen the value-add since then.

We were using Cylance prior to CrowdStrike, and these two products overlapped for a time. We also use an on-premises solution called F-Secure.

CrowdStrike has a much lower rate of false positives than Cylance and the dashboard makes it easier to use.

We used to use Carbon Black. We switched due to the fact that this solution offered us better partnership offers.

We have used Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Carbon Black, and Trend Micro. The observation we have made is the accuracy and detection of CrowdStrike Falcon is excellent.

The company previously used Kaspersky, but CrowdStrike Falcon was far better. I heard that there was some attack, and Kaspersky couldn't handle that. CrowdStrike Falcon, on the other hand, offers excellent protection even from multiple malware attacks, and it has a good application behavior analysis feature.

My company did extensive penetration testing on CrowdStrike Falcon, which had good or far better results than Kaspersky. The company had a bad experience with Kaspersky.

We previously used Cylance. We switched because they weren't innovative. It was the same product that we bought three years ago. They were a great product and they had a job and they did it well. They just didn't ever innovate and they never improved. It's the same products we bought for the same three years. CrowdStrike was more innovative and it seemed to be a better long-term product. They seem to be improving constantly.

Our previous detection software, Webroot, was letting too much stuff through.

We did use another solution previously, but technologies keep changing. We found that CrowdStrike meets our requirements.

We previously used Symantec and we found the detection better with CrowdStrike Falcon.

We previously used different solutions, and the primary differentiating factor was marketing.

We compared multiple solutions in EDR and out of them, CrowdStrike gave the most features and value for money.

We are currently using CrowdStrike, and also running another AV because CrowdStike is not detecting any malicious activities and the other AV is. We are giving it some more time to see if anything happens.

We decided to start using CrowdStrike for our external facing servers because it is the market leader in EDRs. While Trend Micro has an EDR, they call it XPR it is still new to the market.