CyberCPR vs. ThreatCure® ShieldOps Platform

[We use CyberCPR] for investigations on IT that are totally compromised. Using the cloud solution, you can be up and running in minutes with the advantage of being able to access the tool from anywhere on the internet. New users are onboarded quickly and can pick it up fast. It scales well from 3 users to 500 and the server load looks low.

ThreatCure Guardian Care services enable us to block C&C connections from some of our infrastructure systems. They told us that they had seen lateral movements in the early stages, which may indicate a ransom attack. They later provided us with a comprehensive report detailing the threat actors who were utilizing an insider threat in this.

• Clean UI
• Easy to use
• Fast user onboarding
• Managed communications well

• Indepth knowledge of our infrastructure
• Complete Threat Landscape view
• Early detection of threats

• API development has been a long time coming

• Would suggest ThreatCure red-teaming services.

It's simpler to use, doesn't cost vast sums (it's about 1/10 of the others looked at). Users like the cleaner UI and it's not complicated

While some items offer perfect sight, others fall short in other respects. The ThreatCure ShieldOps platform provides our management and incident response team with a 360-degree perspective. This facilitates quicker decision-making for the future. Furthermore, ThreatCure has an opex model, but other suppliers require significant Capex investments, which is an added advantage of SMB organization like us.

• It's low cost means the ROI is higher
• The security means when needed, its there and ready to be used.
• The deployment options mean you can choose one to match budget.

• Now with lesser opex we are getting complete visibility.
• Now would like to acquire Threat Cure Guardian Care Services