Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR vs. VMware Carbon Black App Control

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Traps replaces traditional antivirus with multi-method prevention, a proprietary combination of malware and exploit prevention methods that protect users and endpoints from known and unknown threats.N/A
Carbon Black App Control
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
VMware Carbon Black App Control (formerly CB Protection) is an application control product, used to lock down servers and critical systems, prevent unwanted changes and ensure continuous compliance with regulatory mandates. VMware acquired Carbon Black October 2019.N/A
Pricing
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDRVMware Carbon Black App Control
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDRCarbon Black App Control
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDRVMware Carbon Black App Control
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDRVMware Carbon Black App Control
Small Businesses
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDRVMware Carbon Black App Control
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(12 ratings)
10.0
(3 ratings)
Usability
2.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDRVMware Carbon Black App Control
Likelihood to Recommend
Palo Alto Networks
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.
Read full review
VMware by Broadcom
Cb Protect is best suited somewhere where you want to maximize the lockdown of workstations. So moving past no local admin rights to blocking specific applications and peripherals. The idea would be to have a list of applications you want to run, and then anything else is not able to be used. As stated prior, if you have a very fluid environment where you are having all sorts of new applications installed frequently (I feel for you!!) this is still do-able, but it misses the general idea. I think especially in environments that are more sensitive to new applications, like banks, healthcare systems etc, this is a good fit. The ability to look at application levels, drift, unapproved software etc is very useful.
Read full review
Pros
Palo Alto Networks
  • 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.
Read full review
VMware by Broadcom
  • Controls file writes, executions of the scripts
  • Defends from process injections, memory protection
  • Visibility and lock down posibilities
Read full review
Cons
Palo Alto Networks
  • 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
Read full review
VMware by Broadcom
  • Perhaps more specific training.
Read full review
Usability
Palo Alto Networks
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.
Read full review
VMware by Broadcom
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Palo Alto Networks
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.
Read full review
VMware by Broadcom
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Palo Alto Networks
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.
Read full review
VMware by Broadcom
The big difference between Protect and Barkly/AMP is how exactly it goes about what it's doing. Protect is application whitelisting and program reputation. So the way it's protecting you is using a proprietary reputation service, and hash values to identify applications, and then hitting a list of whitelisted programs to decide if you are able to run that or not, based on the policy you are in. There is a LOT of value in that. We actually are working on transitioning to Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP). The main reason is cost (about the same cost as Cb Protect, but with (most of) the featureset of all 3 Carbon Black products for less than 1/3 of the total spend. AMP works differently, looking at a reputation service powered by Cisco's Talos cloud. You don't really have application whitelisting, but that also reduces how many "requests" you get for applications. So I'll have to find a different way to do whitelisting and USB blocking and the like, but I'm getting more visibility across my network and also built in antivirus (TETRA engine - ClamAV with some work). Barkly is an add that we are looking to put in as it looks at behavior of programs. So specifically it watches for privilege elevation and the like. Thus far all the big name problem children (WannaCry, other ransomware problems) have been caught natively in Barkly day 0.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Palo Alto Networks
  • 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.
Read full review
VMware by Broadcom
  • App Control can ensure Continuous Compliance.
  • Solution can reduce expenses on different security software.
  • Nowadays Zero Trust approach is very important for any organization and Application control is one of the main parts of it.
Read full review
ScreenShots