What is our primary use case?
We're providing this product to our customers. The main intention of using this product is to detect small malware and for vulnerabilities and scanning detection in real-time.
What is most valuable?
The Intel fit was very extensive and comprehensive enough. The visualization tree product feature in this CB defense is quite good. These are the two more notable product features.
The pricing is excellent.
The solution is stable.
What needs improvement?
There's some disparity between the on-premise and the cloud type of application. We basically manage applications versus SaaS-based ones. We were hoping that some of the more advanced features that they offer in the SaaS actually could be similarly offered for the on-premise managed applications. We find that cloud-based solutions are particularly more advanced in product roadmaps compared to on-prem.
There should be more roles in support. There needs to be support for multi-tenancy, the likes of multiple names space. When you use that in a very large organization, you have many departments. It doesn't really provide grouping by department, et cetera.
There's actually a lagging feature that we saw in the SaaS, yet not on the on-premise setup. It seems like the on-premise one was really, really meant for a single department setup rather than for multiple departments.
The solution doesn't allow for high availability configuration. That's also a negative impact relating to the product.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using this solution for about two years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Stability-wise, the product has been quite stable. There's no issue. The maintenance was quite straightforward, and if you don't really touch it, you won't have stability problems.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Medium to large companies will be selecting Carbon Black solutions mainly due to the fact that they needed this to better the security posture checks in the environment, typically in the more regulated environment. Regulatory, regulated environments or companies that are more security-centric will go for this type of product.
While it can scale, it only supports non-HA. Scalability is quite limited. You can only scale vertically - not horizontally.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support can be much improved. They're quite lagged in terms of their support and post-sales. In terms of the roadmap to sell, they tend to sell more towards endpoints and very large enterprises. For a server base, it would lose itself. That's not really their main focus at this point in time. Therefore, it's not as good there.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I'm also familiar with Trend Micro. Trend Micro is advancing the product, keeping it fairly up to date, and covering some aspects of the EDR over time and they're doing a lot of catching up. They actually have caught up. The technology now is quite fairly similar - it's just that the initial focus was in different areas, however, they are filling this gap. It's actually a very strong competitor. In terms of user, features-wise, et cetera, this solution is quite on par. Trend Micro is a security-focused company, so from an enterprise point, probably they are more focused than Carbon Black nowadays being bought over by VMware. Security is probably not their main area of focus at this point in time.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is a bit of a mix. It is simple in the sense the setup was quite straightforward, however, when it comes to configuring for other supports, like emails, notifications, Syslog, et cetera, this identity provider's power integration, which we did for our SML 2.0, is powered based, rather than supported directly through the GUI. That was not so user-friendly, or more complex in terms of configuration.
On a scale from one to five in terms of ease of setup, it'll be about three. It probably takes about half a day just to complete the configuration setup.
The maintenance so far has been quite fairly straightforward. We don't really have any issues with the maintenance. Obviously, I didn't want the downside of the product side, maybe one of the cons is that it doesn't really support HA high availability setup configuration.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
We have a contract, we have actually a BOT tender contract where our different customers from different departments actually purchase their licensing. Generally, the pricing is from a unique cost perspective. I wouldn't know exactly how much they buy typically, as they procure their licenses on their own. Typically, if you compared the pricing to Trend Micro, it's probably about half the cost.
What other advice do I have?
We're not quite a partner. We are a systems integrator and reseller.
We do not have the latest update. We integrate that into our Azure AD itself.
We have the solution deployed both on the cloud and on-premises.
I'd recommend the solution based on the cost. It's really subjective to the organization's needs. If it's for a single, small department, it's fine. If it's for a large organization itself, some of it lacks. Enterprise capabilities are probably a hindrance for a large organization to take up such a product. The limitations of supporting multiple departments with different roles and users, for them to configure what they need, would be a problem. When you talk about alerts et cetera, and also certain tracks, different departments actually probably they have their own different needs, so they wanted something to be a little bit independent, where the configuration settings are unique to the department, rather than something that can only be common for all departments in the current setup.
I'd rate the solution six out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Integrator