Cofense Triage vs. ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes

The tool is very helpful in improving Phishing detection capabilities as it streamlines the process of analyzing user reports a lot. Besides it has a built-in mechanism of rating reporters(end-users) based on their historical performance. Downside - tool requires continuous resource investment to deliver best result. Tool is not helping too much in improving user-education, because automated response process is not immediate and is prone to errors

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

• Separating links and attachments contained in the email, and checking to see if they are known malicious.
• Clustering like emails to save time when responding.
• Providing risks scores with each cluster to give an estimate on which clusters should be addressed first.

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

• There are too many interdependent pieces which you have to acquire separately.
• I think Cofense has a lot of capabilities and usefulness, but I think it's too a la carte.
• We own Cofense and PhishMe currently and there are some gaping holes that require additional licensing to close.

Incentivized

• When you push install to clients, sometimes it will fail with generic errors, and it's hard to find out what is the cause of failure. Fortunately, it doesn't require too many changes on the client-side but it takes time to figure it out.
• When we bought it, we had an option to buy it with email support or phone support. The phone support was very high priced, so we ended up buying email support. when we experience any issues, it takes a long time to get a resolution. Fortunately, we haven't used their support much.
• It had a few incidents with false calls. We are using software that generates reports in MS Word format. The software will call Word to open with a report, but the anti-exploit will consider this as a threat and will block the function. You can put Word in an exception but it won't protect Word from a real exploit in the future.

Incentivized

Cofense is stable and provides easy to use solution to aid the investigation of emails as well as managing simulated phishing campaigns.

Incentivized

The renewal decision is not up to me and also, the current economic situation might not allow renewal

Incentivized

The interface is easy and intuitive.

Incentivized

The software is very easy to manage. In 4 years, we hardly have experienced any issues. It simply works.

Incentivized

We've experienced zero downtime.

Incentivized

No slowness seen.

Incentivized

Whenever I've had a query for the support team, they have got back to me very quickly, and given me very well detailed advice on fixing whatever the issue I had was. They also pointed me to help documents and such where I could find more information if I needed

Incentivized

Training was through, relevant and easy to follow.

Incentivized

The other product had a lot of fails on the auto-processing and did not integrate well with our current environment. One issue had to do with the way it sends the submissions to its processing engine—our email gateway configuration would have blocked this traffic. I also did not like the user interface.

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've experienced zero downtime

Incentivized

• Due to the integration potential, large amounts of time are saved on a daily basis.
• Incident response time has dropped due to the increased information available by having access to phishing emails directly.
• Staff are able to effectively learn how multiple tools in our environment are used by mastering Triage. This has decreased training time greatly and increased the effectiveness of each associate.

Incentivized

• Malwarebytes Endpoint Protection has had a HUGE positive impact on our ROI as we eliminated the need for an entire server, CALs & other licenses as well.
• We are saving a lot of time on the management side of Malwarebytes Endpoint Protection as compared to others as it is cloud based and we are able to manage it from everywhere and not just one server. This has improved our performance and reduced expenses as well.

Incentivized