Its setup is very complex, and it requires guidance from the support team, but it is well worth the effort.

The solution should have overhead in keeping lists of applications that you want don't want to run.

I would like to see the addition of some more features that are in other, similar solutions.

Carbon Black does not use the database for identifying the file, the fields, or malware. It's not using the database, but the user behavior.

The reporting is not good and needs to be improved. It is plain and unattractive, and you need to do a lot of sorting to get it done. Having some form of executive management reporting, in case we need to present it to the board, would be helpful. The current reports are simply too plain for that.

The initial setup is somewhat complex.

There are a lot of false positives where it comes to stuff like the operating system itself, like Microsoft. At first, there was no standard of false positive, that it blocks a lot of store apps and a lot of new processes. 

Another issue is that even sometimes if you approve, for example, Adobe as a publisher, you say any product or anything that's from Adobe has to run. It generally runs, but especially in a large environment and with a lot of users, sometimes, due to some certification validation issues or some other issue, it might stop the process from running. Genuine processes like Adobe and Chrome can get blocked, so that needs to be improved.

I would like for them to develop proper support for Mac OS because currently the Mac OS does not have all the features and it's a bit of a hassle. I'd like to see better support and better integration of the product with Mac OS.