Cynet Room for Improvement
Chief Technology Officer at a tech company with 201-500 employees
Cynet gives a few false positives. It would also be nice if Cynet added the ability to put comments on each device. I would love to be able to say, "This is a computer in the conference room. This is a computer at the Mac desk." That way, when you have an alarm, you don't have to go to a separate registry to see which device has an alert. We have offices worldwide, so sometimes having an alert inside one building is fine, but sometimes we don't know if it's coming into our office in Morocco or the US.
The inability to add contact information inside the Cynet is also an issue because it makes things more complicated. I would like to have a simple feature to enter a contact name and number for the person taking care of that unit or that server. Then I would know who has access to that server registry and so on. But, on the other hand, I understand why they have not done that because they don't want to ask for private information on who is using what and what phone number.
I can see both sides. I trust Cynet, so I don't have a problem sharing that information. However, some customers may have an issue. At the end of the day, it would be a field that the customer can choose to fill or not. So if there were one feature that I would like to improve, this would be at the top of the list.
I'd like to be able to personalize the device labels so I can say, "This is the IT desk in our Montreal office. This is the IT desk in Saint-Laurent. Patrick is a salesman in Toronto who has had his computer attacked." When it's giving a warning, it isn't always providing notice to the user because it lets us decide whether it's a threat or not. So when it solves a problem automatically, I don't have to call.
But some users are sensitive. And at the very least, we need to advise them that one of their files has been encrypted because the security software thought it might be a threat. So I think it's a valid request there, which will not take a long time. I mean, Cynet is already maintaining a database of the unit. So it's just setting a field that the IT can decide to use or not use. So it's a simple implementation of a modification as they had.
Another disadvantage I have found so far is the platform has to be based on a desktop PC or server. It does not deploy on a mobile unit, like a cell phone or something like this. But for our primary requirements, it is doing the job.View full review »
I haven't had the solution for that long. So far, I haven't run into issues. I've been very happy with it.
It's my understanding that they're coming out with different additional features that cover different endpoints. These things all take time, so I'm ecstatic with what they have out right now, for what it's able to provide protection. That said, we actually have protection prevention solutions also, however, with Cynet, we augment these. We're the inside, they're the outside. They're outside on the global scale, watching what attackers are doing, and we're inside trying to plug up cybersecurity holes and known vulnerabilities in applications within our customer's IT ecosystems. So far, it's working well.
They have some things in the pipeline, we understand, and they're going to be able to support Android and all these other devices soon. The key is the devices - which is an aspect that is lacking right now. Every company has that problem, not just Cynet.
That said, you can't really say, "I wish they'd do this" or "I wish they'd do that." No, they need to keep doing what they're doing and helping me fend off these attacks. It's not about what else they could do, as we don't know what the attackers have planned until they strike.
One problem is that Linux servers are not supported. We have our sites, but our servers that are in the cloud supporting the sites are not supported. The second problem is they don't have a solution for mobile yet, but it's expected next year. I want to install the solution on mobile devices. We have quite a lot of tablets and phones.
A mobile solution will close the pyramid of all the clients in the data being used in the organization. Also we have outside suppliers and customers, or suppliers that are attached directly to the organization, and we also covered them.View full review »
Senior Cyberecurity Manager at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
In terms of what could be improved, I would say the usability of this product for new threats. Meaning, not everything which is new is properly seen by the product and not all the required actions are taken. We don't have information for everything which should be generated by this product. I am referring to the functionality and accuracy of the product.
We know that this product is probably not on the higher end of available products because the price of the product is lower than some competitors. We are sure that the functionality is also limited. But in some cases, the information is different. Ours generated from some hostile activity on the workstation is not enough information about the incident provided. The visibility and the explanation of an incident which happens on a workstation should be extended.View full review »
Chief Information Security Officer at a construction company with 10,001+ employees
They're a young company and very responsive but they probably need to mature in their processes. For example, I think it should be easier to deal with false positives. Part of the issue could be that we deployed very quickly and we still have to organize training and things like that. Maybe when we've done that and we understand the solution better, there won't be that issue with the false positives.
It's quite a powerful solution but one feature that they could add would be to have more standardized third-party integrations, then it would be an amazing product. This however can still be achieved with the very comprehensive API.
There has not been much that I could currently identify as major areas for improvement, experience in the US Market will come because while newer to the US market their support has been very good and the solution solid.
Functions-wise, at present the times for events are not a user's local time, but we assume that will be corrected soon. It would nice to be able to see local time zone capability.View full review »
CTO / CISO at a cloud provider with 11-50 employees
I can't think of anything, in particular, I would like to see changed. For our customers, it covers everything they need.
The solution just needs to keep maturing and they need to keep up with the threat landscape to ensure they're protecting clients well as time passes.View full review »
Compliance reports need to improve. However, I think they might be releasing this in an upcoming update. More report customization is also needed.View full review »
They need to create an Android app to support more mobile devices.
A support center in Asia is needed.View full review »
Associate Director at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Its dashboard is not so good. On the dashboard, they don't show the count for client endpoints, which is a failure of this product. This count should be shown on the dashboard. I have 1,000 clients, but I can't see it anywhere on the dashboard.View full review »
I would like to see support for mobile protection and some additional reports included.View full review »