oldschool

Level 23
Verified
Nice article, FWIW. I also found this discussion by endpoint users, it's 2 pages of forum posts with some interesting real-world experience with Cylance Protect.

Edit: Notice how the cooler heads mention CP as part of a layered security framework.

 

Pixy Stix

Level 1
Edit: Notice how the cooler heads mention CP as part of a layered security framework.
Unfortunately, heated discussions happen in these type of threads far too often.

Emotions have no place in software discussions. It is the reactive emotional ones that ruin it for those of us who are only interested in brutally honest and open discussions.

Rabid defense of any product will only ever promote a single-sided perspective. Constant, intense defense of any product is inherently biased. More importantly, it employs the intolerance and deceit that it invariably accuses the "basher" of. Over-reaction, carrying-on across forums, and rant posts bespeak of insecurities, over-attachment and an absence of objectivity. In the end, it shows an adamant refusal to accept the facts and a clear lack of credibility.
 
Last edited:

oldschool

Level 23
Verified
@Pixy Stix - The OP obviously had encountered some info that many people are familiar with, and seemed to feel powerless about what endpoint would be used. What I liked were the system admins who had varied experiences with it, and/or with other vendors, etc. Their replies were level-headed for the most part. And I liked that thread is pretty current, after all the past hoopla that has appeared over the last few months/years.
 

Slyguy

Level 40
I know of an organization with 50,000 endpoints with aggressively managed Cylance Protect. No compromise thus far, all audits are clean. Of course, Cylance Protect is combined with some pretty beefy Fortinet technologies and a properly managed IT infrastructure. But those should be a part of all business IT practices, and if they are, Cylance Protect itself, with nothing else is more than sufficient.
 

Pixy Stix

Level 1
@Pixy Stix - The OP obviously had encountered some info that many people are familiar with, and seemed to feel powerless about what endpoint would be used. What I liked were the system admins who had varied experiences with it, and/or with other vendors, etc. Their replies were level-headed for the most part. And I liked that thread is pretty current, after all the past hoopla that has appeared over the last few months/years.
I thought that whole thread was comical. Cylance is just software. All software has warts. You just have to look and find them.

Always trying to solve the security problem with software. An algorithm that will never succeed in the Universe's entire lifetime.

But those should be a part of all business IT practices, and if they are, Cylance Protect itself, with nothing else is more than sufficient.
I wouldn't bet the bank on Cylance because it has been shown to fail when "shouldah, couldah, wouldah, but didn't."

Except for a few memorable cases, all the enterprise security I have seen ranges from inept to mismanagement to negligence. Step down the ladder to SMB (< 1000 employees) and it is essentially home user level operations.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Nevi and oldschool

Similar Threads

Similar Threads