Automox vs. ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes

The reason I would score it a nine is because of the inability to “run as.” Since it only runs as a system, this makes some tasks impossible. It would be beneficial to have an encrypted set of credentials in the UI that we can use to “run as,” and also the ability to run as the current user with elevated permissions would be nice. In terms of patching, Automox does a good job, and being able to use Automox to run PowerShell on a computer without needing to open up ports for WinRM is a great feature.

Incentivized

I think Malwarebytes is the best anti-malware company. I think it is well-suited for any situation and any device. I think Malwarebytes does the best on Windows and on MacOS. Also, Malwarebytes is always improving, and you can tell they are a company that stays on top of cybersecurity trends. If you have a tight budget or looking for the cheapest solution, then Malwarebytes may not be the solution for you. To clarify, I don't think Malwarebytes is that much more expensive compared to its closest competitors.

Incentivized

• Shows applications installed on a specific asset
• Able to push policies and updates remotely , creating policies is easy.
• Keep track of compliant devices and when is the last time they have connected to the servers
• All the great information provided within one single device

Incentivized

• Protects against malware - No matter how much training you give end users on social hacking, there is always a breach at some point.
• Protects against ransomware - Ransomware could spell disaster for a company...it could literally shut the doors for good.
• Centralized administration - Without a terrific centralized method to manage all the systems being protected, it would require an extra position just to maintain all endpoints.

Incentivized

• I would like to see more detailed error messages when a patch fails. Perhaps at which step it failed at, downloading, installing, etc.
• It would be helpful if we could see what stage of installing or downloading a patch is at through a percentage or status bar instead of a vague "Installing..." message
• It would also be helpful to have a way to kill or end scripts that are stuck instead of waiting 24 hours for them to automatically end. Something like an "End all actions" button for endpoints on our side would be extremely helpful when testing a script that had a bad line or action in it.

Incentivized

• poor customer service
• dashboard says product is working EVEN THOUGH IT WAS NOT!
• slow response to concerns that should be easy to remedy
• creates baggage which caused certain computers and the network to run more slowly
• caused 3 computers on our network top have windows errors and network issues

It's been a great tool for me. It has helped me become more efficient in my job and securing our network and machine footprint.

Incentivized

When I first used the tool in my home systems MANY years ago, I wished for a Business version. I was once at a focus group for a major antivirus company, and one attendee’s feedback to “what could we do better?” was “buy out MalwareBytes and add it to your tool”. I’ve used the Business version since it first became available, and have continued to be a dedicated user through the many iterations and improvements

Incentivized

Automox has excellent dashboards that help to identify key performance indicators of where your patching program stands, what to prioritize, and what issues you have. Where Automox struggles is easily identifying what issues are preventing successful patching, seeing what manual patches are successfully installing/not installing, and easily remediating issues with installation issues.

Incentivized

It simply works. It doesn't require the hand-holding and monitoring that some other solutions do. It's simple to deploy and maintain, and adding custom content such as Exceptions require minimal effort. I’ve had to add a few exceptions for internal-use, in-house-developed tools, but it’s quite simple to do so within the online interface

Incentivized

In my experience, they were responsive but the fixes were more like bandaids than a fix for the underlying problems which they admitted were on their end.

Incentivized

As I mentioned, we have only email support. Their phone support was very expensive. If we ever have any issues, we have to email them and wait for their response. In most cases, I have figured out the issue on my own. The software is very stable so we haven't used their support much.

Incentivized

i was able to implement automox with the help from their support to push it out via our MDM of maas360

Incentivized

I first implemented this more than 10 years ago, when it required an in-site setup with SQL Server (or SQL Express), and even that was pretty easy. With the move to centralized web management some treats ago, it’s become even easier to deploy

Incentivized

Automox is able to scale better than PDQ Deploy. We were happier with the 3rd party software patching since we have a lot of different software we use across departments. PDQ deploy required a lot more manual intervention to stay on top of deployments. Automox just ended up being a timesaver for us in the end.

Incentivized

It's no contest. Cisco AMP, Umbrella and Endpoint use vast amounts of resources and provide little protection when compared with Malwarebytes. One client recently replaced Cisco with MWB and found over 7,300 vulnerabilities on 352 endpoints, including 120 listed as Critical and 7,180 listed as High, with CVE's dating back to 2008.

• We used to use a different patching solution and since switching to Automox, I have been able to cut the amount of time I spend on vulnerability management by 50% or more. I love how "set it and forget it" some of the policies can be. I love how simple it is to keep an eye on things.

Incentivized

• The ease of remediation has saved our IT team a number of hours manually installing, for example, the free version of Malwarebytes to remove infections, and then cleaning the machine up. Being able to centrally send commands to clean the device is much more efficient.
• The centralised management has also alerted us to infections on machines that we might not otherwise have known about, as the existing AV had not detected them, saving us potential data loss, or system damage.

Incentivized