ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes vs. OpenText EnCase Endpoint Security

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

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

• 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

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

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

• 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

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

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

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

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.

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

• 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

• 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