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 setup is pretty simple."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"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."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"I like that you can implement it in the managed service portfolio."
"It provides good protection from ransomware and malware attacks. It is very good as compared to other products. If any threat is there, their support is very good. They immediately respond to the users and do a follow-up. They call us and also provide email support."
"In terms of incident response, Cynet can contain attacks, offer a trial period to customers, and uninstall if not continued. The most valuable aspect is its integration capabilities, covering endpoints and network data for a comprehensive view of threats."
"We are protecting all our workstations."
"A good feature is how the solution packages varied information into a single dashboard that's readable and meets our needs."
"The dashboard is beautiful, overall easy of use, and the UBA and NBA features are valued."
"It can be deployed in autonomous mode, and then it automatically blocks malware threats."
"I like the Cynet Correlator™ feature."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting has all of these features integrated into one console, making it effective."
"The interface is clean and well-organized, making it simple to navigate and find what we need."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"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 biggest improvement has been knowing that something unauthorized isn't going to get installed on anyone’s machines."
"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."
"Feature-wise, the learning mode and the fact that it's blocking everything are the most valuable. I don't see why more companies don't use the type of product."
"Every single feature has been invaluable."
"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."
"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."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"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 support needs improvement."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The reporting is a little weak and could be improved. The other downside is that Cynet does not use the local time zone. It's based off of Greenwich Mean Time."
"A support center in Asia is needed."
"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."
"Cynet fails to deploy the same technology in mobile devices."
"I think the technical support could be better."
"The solution just needs to keep maturing and they need to keep up with the threat landscape to ensure they're protecting clients well as time passes."
"In future releases, I would like to see cloud security aspects included."
"I would like to see more emphasis on building the data lake and storing all endpoint data in the enterprise data lake so that data mining can be performed"
"More visibility in the built-ins would be nice."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
"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."
"One area I see for improvement is in the visibility of support tickets within the ThreatLocker ticketing system."
"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."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
"The reporting could be 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.