ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR

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

Malware that doesn’t leave files behind has become widely available. Anyone who can afford to reverse this trend should purchase technology. Application whitelisting isn’t for everyone, and Palo Alto Networks Traps can help. Enterprises looking for a low-affected, next-generation solution with high protection should consider it. PAN Traps is a great product at a reasonable price, and I highly recommend it.

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

• Direct Access to devices via Live Terminal which provides operations with scripting, triage, and preservation of artifacts.
• Behavioral Indicators of Compromise which provides alerts on events regarding groups of hosts and their signatures.
• Querying complex data sets involving a variety of devices for network connections, hashes, DNS, etc.

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

• Traps doesn't seem to function as a traditional A/V very well, so it's better as another layer to your endpoint protection
• Traps can cause issues with some legacy or custom programs, so exceptions may have to be made
• Traps falsely identifies things as malicious at times, this is not often though

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

Day to day, Cortex is easy to use when you have no alerts and when an agent upgrade doesn't go south. Alerts are far too "clicky", there's too many steps to drilling down to what actually happened to trigger an alert. Investigating alerts in Cortex takes about 5x longer than it should.

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

The support we receive from Palo Alto is one of the best aspects of Traps. It is very easy to recommend their support. It seems much easier to connect directly with someone with a deep understanding of the product rather than other companies where you basically have to make an airtight case that it is some kind of non-standard issue that can't be solved with existing documentation. Palo Alto digs deep and helps with advanced troubleshooting to get things working.

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.

Traps is the slickest interface, easy to use and intuitive rule making, and the rest just didn't quite stack up to the performance level of Traps. McAfee and Kaspersky just hog processor and RAM power. I didn't like the interface and functionality of SentinelOne as much as Traps. Palo Alto really put a lot of time into the development of this software, and had some of the founding fathers of IT Security heading the development process. Can't beat that.

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

• After putting Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR on a user's system, users came back with a positive response that there are no performance issues now.
• We are able to track and control granular suspicious and malicious activities.
• Web controls are missing, which if they would have been there would have been very helpful.

Incentivized