Carbon Black EDR vs. OpenText EnCase Endpoint Security

We are able to check if any phishing link was visited by the user or not. To check for the whether any file is executed on the machine or not. To check on which port connections are being made by the machine. To create custom watchlist for alert to be investigated by an analyst. To check every process executed in the machine for a specified range.

Incentivized

It is more suited to environments that have a large internal user base since there will be more incidents that require forensic analysis. It will be less suited for environments that have a small internal user base due to the fact that there would be fewer incidents that require forensic analysis, but it really depends on the industry that a small internal user base is a part of.

Incentivized

• Process tree view of endpoint activity
• Ability to pull files from host
• Threat Intelligence integration
• Isolate a host

Incentivized

• Functionality meets minimal requirements, since it performs forensic investigations as advertised.

Incentivized

• Number of false positive which are triggered due to threat feeds are sometimes more needs to be fine tuned by the client.
• In very rare scenarios processes are not captured properly.

Incentivized

• Their UI definitely needs to be more user-friendly, right now it is very cumbersome to run and view investigations.
• Authentication mechanism should be a simple username/password, not certificate-based which is difficult to manage.
• Needs better support documentation for the product, it is difficult to find solutions to issues that we run into.

Incentivized

Because support is non-existent whenever you have a functionality issue using the product. Also since the UI is so cumbersome to use we could use as much support as possible. Whenever we ask for support we are told to take the training which costs us more money. I believe that support should be easily accessible and affordable for the client

Incentivized

CB Response allows for a better view of what happened on the endpoint and provides more functionality out of the box then the FireEye Endpoint Security Product. CB Response allows you to basically have a remote connection into the CLI of an endpoint. This allows you to view the file system, run programs/scripts on the host, etc. FireEye Endpoint Security does not have this functionality.

Incentivized

The other forensic tool that is a direct competitor to EnCase and wasn't listed above is the Forensic Toolkit or FTK. I believe that FTK is a better tool overall simply because it is easier to manage and use when it comes to investigations. Unfortunately, I wasn't part of the decision process and EnCase was the tool selected, otherwise, I would have recommended FTK.

Incentivized

• It is helping to protect us from potential loss of revenue that would be caused by malware or a compromised account.
• It took some time in deploying in the environment , but that time is much worth it because of the results we are getting now.
• It helps in hunting, which help us check and protect our environment from any cyber attacks.

Incentivized

• One negative impact would be that since the UI is cumbersome to use we would need to spend more money on training which is not always feasible.
• Another negative impact would be that since there is not much support available this slows down investigations due to finding out how to troubleshoot and fix functionality issues.
• One positive impact would be that since it meets minimal requirements when it comes to forensic analysis it gives us visibility on any malicious activity occurring on a user's endpoint.

Incentivized