Carbon Black App Control vs. Imperva Data Security vs. Protegrity Data Protection Platform

Cb Protect is best suited somewhere where you want to maximize the lockdown of workstations. So moving past no local admin rights to blocking specific applications and peripherals. The idea would be to have a list of applications you want to run, and then anything else is not able to be used. As stated prior, if you have a very fluid environment where you are having all sorts of new applications installed frequently (I feel for you!!) this is still do-able, but it misses the general idea. I think especially in environments that are more sensitive to new applications, like banks, healthcare systems etc, this is a good fit. The ability to look at application levels, drift, unapproved software etc is very useful.

Incentivized

Compliance to audits and HiTrust certification. It is key in ensuring that our audits are completed in a timely manner with no repeats of data requests and that we also are HiTrust certified at our organization. Personally while the data obfuscation is available I am not sure I would fully trust that the data is completely sanitized if need be. It's not against the Imperva product but more of issue of data being used.

Incentivized

• Controls file writes, executions of the scripts
• Defends from process injections, memory protection
• Visibility and lock down posibilities

Incentivized

• Alerts when suspicious activity is detected
• Records all database transactions for analysis
• Determines activities in stored procedures

• Perhaps more specific training.

Incentivized

• Navigation of the menus can get confusing pretty quickly. Since there are so many, it is extremely easy to get lost. Almost too many options and data.
• Configuring the agents can be very difficult if you are new to it. Having to save after every single change made to an agent during a configuration can be very tedious. Also having to make sure certain options are checked off in two separate places for a single option is very annoying.
• Navigation of the menus is not always intuitive and not very obvious that the option you are looking change is located in that menu.

Incentivized

The big difference between Protect and Barkly/AMP is how exactly it goes about what it's doing. Protect is application whitelisting and program reputation. So the way it's protecting you is using a proprietary reputation service, and hash values to identify applications, and then hitting a list of whitelisted programs to decide if you are able to run that or not, based on the policy you are in. There is a LOT of value in that. We actually are working on transitioning to Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP). The main reason is cost (about the same cost as Cb Protect, but with (most of) the featureset of all 3 Carbon Black products for less than 1/3 of the total spend. AMP works differently, looking at a reputation service powered by Cisco's Talos cloud. You don't really have application whitelisting, but that also reduces how many "requests" you get for applications. So I'll have to find a different way to do whitelisting and USB blocking and the like, but I'm getting more visibility across my network and also built in antivirus (TETRA engine - ClamAV with some work). Barkly is an add that we are looking to put in as it looks at behavior of programs. So specifically it watches for privilege elevation and the like. Thus far all the big name problem children (WannaCry, other ransomware problems) have been caught natively in Barkly day 0.

Incentivized

• App Control can ensure Continuous Compliance.
• Solution can reduce expenses on different security software.
• Nowadays Zero Trust approach is very important for any organization and Application control is one of the main parts of it.

Incentivized

• Allowed us to meet important compliance requirements.
• When protecting critical data, we can see exactly how it's being used and by whom.
• Licensing costs are very reasonable.
• It takes a fair amount of administration to use properly.