BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity Reviews

I use CylancePROTECT for intrusion detection, so it's more of an antivirus. I also use its optics feature for live monitoring of every computer.

What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system.

The AI of CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. I'm on a trial license of SentinelOne, and its AI is much better than what's on CylancePROTECT.

I want CylancePROTECT to have an automatic overruling feature in the future for specific situations. In my previous example, a colleague couldn't install Oracle VM VirtualBox because I didn't specify files and programs that CylancePROTECT should block. Sometimes, I want the solution to be less strict so that when a file or application comes from a well-known developer, CylancePROTECT should let it pass, regardless of what file it contains.

I've been using CylancePROTECT for five years.

CylancePROTECT is a very stable product, but in terms of updates and features, it's a letdown.

Scalability-wise, CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. SentinelOne is more scalable, though that could also be because it's bigger. For small businesses, CylancePROTECT is scalable.

Regarding scalability, I'm rating CylancePROTECT as five out of ten.

My colleagues said that support-wise, CylancePROTECT is slow to respond, and it's challenging to communicate with support or get a person on the phone. You can only contact support via email or chat when sometimes, you prefer calling support or speaking to someone via phone.

Email support is fine, but the level of support needs to be more in-depth, so I'm giving the CylancePROTECT support team a six.

Neutral

My company went with CylancePROTECT because my company has smaller companies or customers than enterprise customers. It's easier to deploy CylancePROTECT for smaller businesses, and it works better than SentinelOne, which is more for multinationals or enterprise businesses.

The setup process for CylancePROTECT was pretty straightforward. Setup-wise, it's an eight out of ten.

How long deployment takes depends on the client. For a bigger client, it might take around two weeks for every device to be deployed, but for a small business with a few employees, deploying CylancePROTECT might take a few days.

CylancePROTECT is worth the money, but I'm not sure of its exact price. I can't remember off the top of my head.

We evaluated SentinelOne.

At the moment, my company uses CylancePROTECT, but it's considering using SentinelOne in the future for enterprise clients.

Between five thousand to ten thousand people use CylancePROTECT. That's the total for my company and its customers. Specifically, sixty to seventy people in my company use the solution, with forty engineers and developers, myself included. In contrast, twenty to twenty-five people belong to sales, marketing, and management teams.

CylancePROTECT requires maintenance, but not much because my company has strict policies. For example, a colleague came to me a few days ago because he wanted to install Oracle VM VirtualBox but couldn't because CylancePROTECT wasn't allowing him to install it. In that case, I either have to acknowledge it or make some policy changes because CylancePROTECT is too strict.

To anyone looking into implementing CylancePROTECT, my first question would be, "Are you working in a small or big company?" My advice to you would be based on your answer. My next question would be how strict you want your antivirus to be because if you want it to be less rigid and with less maintenance, then I'd tell you to use CylancePROTECT. If you're looking for a stricter solution with more maintenance, go with SentinelOne.

My rating for CylancePROTECT is eight out of ten because its technical support could be better, plus it needs to update its software regularly. The solution also has several areas for improvement, but the team still needs to work on it. In general, as an antivirus with an optics feature, CylancePROTECT is very good but still has room for improvement.

My company is a CylancePROTECT partner.

We use CylancePROTECT for import protection, which is why we got it. 

We switched from one product to another, believing this would be a better fit based on what we were informed, but it just didn't work as it should.

We have been dissatisfied with CylanceProtect and CylanceOPTICS and want to leave within the next several months. It just hasn't been an effective tool.

It was not effective. There were a lot of false positives, even when we use Adobe, and everybody uses Adobe, which is not a threat.

We are in the process of moving on to another solution.

I have been working with CylancePROTECT for just over two years.

We are an enterprise company.

I have experience with Blackberry Cylance.

I have some experience with CylanceOPTICS which is part of CylanceGateway.

Its setup is simple if you have a Windows device; it is executable. 

You start the program, make a few clicks, and then enter an extension code into it. Then it begins to mute services before installing. It's fairly simple, maybe five or six minutes.

We never implemented a single solution. We completed what is known as the university installation, and it does the bundle installation. The single-bite variant was never used. We used the bundle to make it easier.

We went through a third party initially to do the renewal, but we won't be renewing, we will move on to something else.

We received both. We prepared a quotation for a year. It is based on a calendar year. We spent a year on both Protect and Optics.

I would rate the pricing a three out of five.

I would rate CylancePROTECT a three out of ten.

The best use case is that it actually lifts off a lot of burden on customers, especially when they are deploying Cylance compared to other solutions. 

One of the best features of the solution is that it's easy to deploy. Second is the management part and the protection. It's way ahead of the other solutions compared to the signature-based one.

The base platform, the CylancePROTECT is a very good technology. If you upgraded that into a CylanceOPTICS, that will also help, however, CylancePROTECT itself can do a lot of protection.

There's a feature that they added called PERSONA. This is AI-based user behavior monitoring which is very useful.

It's straightforward to deploy.

If they can add more features on top of their Persona feature that would be ideal. It could also improve the UEBA feature of Cylance.

I've been working with the solution for around five years. I started using it around 2016.

As a cloud-based management platform, it's very stable. The version of the agent is very minimal in terms of updates. In terms of support, they have very broad support on several operating systems. The stability is quite high for this kind of solution.

It's a cloud-based management platform. It's very scalable. It's easy to ramp up the number of devices that you want to be managed by this kind of solution. It's highly scalable.

Our clients have actually upgraded and ramped up the number of licenses from the first time I deployed and introduced them to the solution. Most of our customers have expanded usage via the number of licenses they have.

I've used technical support in the past. The technical support, the SLA, if they can improve that aspect of the product it'll be much appreciated.

Neutral

I've also worked with CylancePERSONA over the past year or so. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not overly complex. 

The management and maintenance is also very easy. 

What I've heard from my customers is that Cylance, in terms of pricing, is a bit higher compared to other prominent solutions like Kaspersky and Symantec, however, that's about it in terms of what I know about the product pricing.

I'm working in a distributor company and we are actually selling CylancePROTECT.

The primary platform is a cloud-based solution. It is managed in the cloud. The one on-premise is called the hybrid platform where you can also do management locally on your site.

The best way to see the solution is to try it out. Try it first before worrying about pricing and see if it will meet your needs and how it works for your business.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. They simply need to improve the SLA, the response, and the Persona feature. If they do, I would rate it higher. 

We are currently using Blackberry Protect as our main endpoint solution, for threat prevention, script control, and scanning of malware. This is the core functionality of the Protect module.

We have the Blackberry Optics, which is the AI module of Blackberry Protect. It is called Blackberry Protect Plus Optics. The Optics feature logs all of the behavior of the servers. For example, when someone runs a PowerShell script and it blocks, it will learn the behavior and knows what to do the next time another user triggers that specific functionality.

It is currently deployed on-premises but our administration dashboard is in the cloud.

The agents are installed for our servers and reporting is to the Blackberry cloud.

This is still new to us. We have explored this solution and it fulfills our requirements, in terms of live malware detection.

We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting.

When it comes to the management of the application of agents, especially for us as an IT team the dashboard is much easier to manage in the McAfee solution.

We were looking to have a multi-factor authentication with the administration dashboard to log in, because it's cloud-based. 

There is no integration with Google Authenticator and other solution providers. 

We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard.

We have been using Blackberry Protect for just less than a year.

We are two versions behind the latest one.

Definitely, Blackberry Protect is a stable product. We have not had any kind of blue screen of death or crosstabs.

It's really lightweight in terms of resource consumption as well and in terms of memory and CPU consumption, it's quite low which is very good for us for other applications.

It's a scalable solution.

We have approximately 150 people in our organization who are using it.

We are also using Microsoft Outlook to block any kind of unwanted applications, which our users try to run in the background.

The initial setup is very straightforward. You just click on the MSI and provide the key to register for it to sync to the cloud dashboard.

We have a team of seven IT resources who have an account under Blackberry administration.

We pay our license on a yearly basis and have just renewed for two years.

We have not evaluated other options. For the time being, we are very satisfied with what we have.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

There is always room for improvement. I would rate Blackberry Protect an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for endpoint protection for our external devices and laptops.

The deployment of updates is easy.

Not having OPTICS doesn't allow us to do any history. We don't have OPTICS, but FortiEDR comes with things like OPTICS, which is nice because we are not able to see more. 

OPTICS gives you things that FortiEDR has built in. For Cylance, there is an add-on to do the things that come with that solution.

It would be nice if Cylance didn't separate PROTECT and OPTICS and put them together and made them on the same price point as FortiEDR, and some other ones rather than having to pay extra for something that the others already have built-in, and seen to do better.

It often lets you waive something for the firm or for the whole company and then comes back and blocks the same thing because you have to do the certificate instead of the hash. You are finding yourself having to approve for the same program, the same application, the same file more than once and it's frustrating.

While the deployment of updates is easy, it would be good to have some more information about which version to use, because the versions that are available seem to be outdated. 

When you go to the admin section, you will see that you will have the latest update from months ago and a month before that, and a month before that. 

I have a hard time believing that there are no more updates in between when there are things that are out all the time. It just doesn't make you feel like you're getting covered or have the best protection, which you should have. 

I have been using this solution for two years.

We are using one of the newer versions. I don't always install the updates.

The stability varies. It's not consistent and it's frustrating.

Things that are blocked, you waive and it comes back. It's very frustrating. It doesn't keep up with the machines. 

You have a lot of machines and if you reimage a lot you will see many duplicates that you have to export and remove from figuring out which one's the MAC address. It should have an easy way to know that a machine is re-imaged, and not adding to your list of devices.

You end up having all these devices that are no longer being scanned that you have to figure out what they are. It is frustrating.

We have approximately 200 users in our organization. It's for everyone in our accounting firm, who are accountants, auditors, IT, and HR accounting.

We don't have plans to continue using this solution, we are considering other options.

We don't go through technical support directly. We go through a reseller and they take care of it. We have never directly talked to BlackBerry or Cylance about any issues that we have had.

Previously, we had McAfee ePO. We changed to CylaneProtect, a solution that we felt would be a better fit, and that was not managed in-house, on a local server that we used for that. It was time to move on from that.

The initial setup was fine. It's doesn't take a long time to deploy.

Uninstalling is difficult. Sometimes it doesn't remove easily, and that is frustrating. 

It would be nice if it had an uninstalled feature within the dashboard, in the SAS part of the application online, because it would do everything itself. Unless it is something that I have missed or that I didn't see. 

With FortiEDR you can go in, and you can uninstall from the dash, find the endpoint you right-click, or you click a button, then you choose to uninstall and it pulls it from the machine. You don't have to put in any keys, or anything. It does it from there. I don't believe that Cylance does that, but it would be nice if it did.

We have a team of two, myself and my colleague maintain this solution.

The deployment and implementation were completed in-house.

I would advise that they keep in mind what it doesn't do and be open to looking at things that include more and cost less.

I would rate CylanceProtect a four out of ten.

We put the product on all of our desktops and servers.

The solution has broken down the organization by taking down the network about six times in two years.

The most functional item that we use is the process to turn off the false flags that it causes.

They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features.

For future releases, it would be helpful to have an easy uninstall button. The reason being, unless you connect the system to the internet, which you may not want to do, Cylance cannot be uninstalled easily. They claim it's practically impossible. If you have access to the online admin panel, it's very easy to uninstall Cylance. There is no easy way to uninstall locally. I have read online there is a convoluted way with a series of reboots and safety reboots that you could possibly do it locally.

I have been using it for about two years.

It is not stable. The solution has caused six crashes over two years, with one of them requiring us to rebuild all of our Windows 10 devices.

Scalability is pretty good. We have around 100 users using the solution. However, when we rebuild new desktops, we're not installing it on them.

We have used Symantec before and a MSSP came in with a package to help us get more secure, but it really was a failure.

The biggest issue we have with the product is it gives false positives.

Beware and work out a process to restore items that were deleted by false flags.

Work out a process to investigate any odd behaviour or troubleshooting tickets with open source software being even a small sub-component.

For the majority of installs, the Cylance is going to break because of the small sub-component that's open-source that is out of date. Always no matter what problem is happening, double-check to see if there were any flags in Cylance because it's probably going to be Cylance blocking something along the line. It will drive you nuts to work with your third-party technical support to track down an issue to then find out it was Cylance blocking one small facet of it.

Work out all those details with your Cylance team first, this way, whenever you have an issue, you can identify that Cylance is involved because it's involved in everything.

An example of an issue we were having was while we were trying to install a check scanner the install did not work. Cylance was blocking an old open source piece of software that comes from Kodak that you can't update because Kodak says it is the latest version of our installer for the check scanner. The installer for the check scanner includes the open-source piece of software from Kodak that's out of date. This causes the entire check scanner not to work, Cylance blocks the main installation because of the sub-installation of the open-source software.

Make sure your ducks are in a row so that you can detect when Cylance is causing an issue, report it and get it whitelisted. If you do not, you're going to spend an inordinate amount of time figuring out whether or not Cylance did something to block you, whitelisting and then more time justifying why you need it whitelisted.

I'm sure we were much more protected with it on, but the problem is if you're protecting me from my network being taken down, by taking my network down, you are not protecting it. For this reason, I rate CylancePROTECT a five out of ten.  

We primarily use the solution to protect us against ransomware.

The solution is very quick at easily changing the levels of protection for each computer and the server. It's very easy to control and to see what is happening with each computer. It's very easy to choose, which computer I can look at and check. 

It would be very important to have any kind of utility in the computer for Cylance to install monitoring into it in a simpler way. A computer should be able to self-scan on command. It is not easy to do that just yet. 

The company that sells us the licenses sometimes doesn't know how to do certain things. They should be offered more training or something, or maybe we could cover out channels ourselves and could have the knowledge of how to do everything ourselves without a third party needing to be involved.

I started using the solution for seven months or so.

The stability is quite good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution is very scalable. There aren't any issues with expanding the product.

At this time, we have about 18 people on the solution.

We haven't needed to reach out to technical support just yet. Therefore, I can't speak to their level of knowledge or responsiveness.

We previously used McAfee. We were worried the solution wouldn't be able to effectively protect us, so we looked for other options.

The initial setup was a little bit complex. We had to take some time learning the machines and how to protect ourselves. That part of the implementation took a good amount of time.

We had a few problems setting everything up, and with those issues, it took us maybe two months to deploy the product in total.

We currently have one person that handles the maintenance of the solution for us. He's an engineer.

We did have one outside person that assisted us with the setup.

We have a couple of issues surrounding licensing. The person who assisted us had a couple of problems trying to integrate another set of licenses that we had before.

I don't know exactly which version we're using. A person in charge of that in our office was the person who looked for the product. I just read some things about it and I found that it was a very good product. 

We have been trained to learn how to use the product and now we have a very good experience with it. The problem is, for me, sometimes it creeps into the computers and into the servers that we want to get running. Sometimes it has problems. That said, it's a very good product. We are okay with how it works.

I would recommend Cylance. I think it's very good and very stable. The only thing to keep in mind is you to have a very good channel and someone who really knows how to use the console and everything

Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

CylancePROTECT came packaged with our HR and IT management system, which was a selling point. It allows us to ensure that every single computer is always up to date as far as vulnerability protection and we can manage all the threats and everything from a centralized dashboard.  

We can see what is going on and that really allows us to have good insight into the programs that we should be working on, the applications or websites that may need attention — those type things. That insight has been a real positive for us so far.  

I think Cylance has just done a great job for us so far. I think that is the headliner for our experience with the product. The computer interface really has next to nothing on it, which is nice. You see what you need to see and there are really no distractions or extra noise.  

We have not had anything major come up that the product has not handled — at least not that we have known of. There have been a total of zero issues.  

I would like to see a little bit of additional reporting or insight as to what it is doing exactly. I do not think I need anything else included in the next release that I know of. Honestly, just improvement in the reporting would be good enough.  

I have been using Cylance PROTECT for two or three months.  

The stability of CylancePROTECT is great.  

The scalability of CylancePROTECT is very good. We have about 15 staff members in your organization currently using the product on a variety of devices.  

I have not had to call technical support during the time we have been using the product because we have had zero issues.  

We did use other products before CylancePROTECT. I used Kaspersky Internet Security for a long time before we moved over to CylancePROTECT. We used Kaspersky Internet Security because it was a great fit for us.  

In comparison, the only thing that I would say about Kaspersky is that sometimes on startup it would kind of slow the computer down a bit. It took up a lot of resources. It would just last for a short period of time on startup and then that would be it. Everything would return to normal.  

The other thing was that, as a growing company, it was difficult to manage all the installs. To make sure that Kaspersky was provisioned out to every computer and that it was always up to date made for a little more maintenance than seemed necessary. That extra maintenance was really what influenced our decision to move over to the CylancePROTECT product.  

The initial installation and setup are straightforward.  

We did use a reseller for our initial deployment.  

I believe the product cost is about $5, per user, per month.  

CylancePROTECT is going to tell you if there are any issues and you are going to be able to see everything from one single dashboard. If there are any issues on any computers across your whole architecture you will know about it.  

If there were advice that I would give to someone thinking about working with CylancePROTECT, I would just say it is extremely — extremely — simple to manage and deploy.  

On a scale of one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate CylancePROTECT as a ten-out-of-ten as per our experience with it thus far.