ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Reviews

I use ThreatLocker at a bank and at a trucking company mainly because one has been hit with ransomware a few dozen times, and for the other, we just wanted to ensure it never got hit. It has actually stopped threats in their tracks at the trucking company. We haven't had a problem yet, so thankfully, nobody randomly clicks on things. 

At the other company, there are 300 employees in a warehouse, and only two of them are computer literate, so they click on everything. It has been very helpful in reducing the madness that comes with phishing and random malware or ransomware.

ThreatLocker has been excellent for reducing the issues with ransomware and malware, keeping end users in check, and ensuring they have to request access for certain actions. This process involves verification for necessity, particularly when considering VPN bypasses.

The application control has been great so far, and while I am still exploring the network access controls, I unfortunately don't have access to one module I would love to have due to licensing restrictions. 

It's easy to use in regard to reducing attack surfaces. For me, it's a piece of cake. We can have something approved within 30 seconds, thanks to the mobile app.

We haven't eliminated security solutions. We just add to it, and ThreatLocker has been a great addition. We also have Kaseya and ThreatLocker as a supplement to that. It's useful. They have overlap, and we look at the overlap as a good thing.

It's helped your organization save on operational costs or expenses by ensuring that many fewer hours are spent dealing with ransomware nonsense. I cannot count the amount of hours that I personally have not had to put in to recovering an environment from a ransomware event. The last big one took us about three weeks to completely recover from. Since we've grouped ThreatLocker in, the management of that whole setup has gone down to just daily help desk tasks and general server maintenance instead of having the whole system on fire. There are probably thousands of hours of saved time between our teams. It's been great so far. 

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's ability to block access to unauthorized applications is great. It's my biggest protection, the blocked applications. In a lot of cases, you go to install something yourself that you need for management, and it comes in and says, nope. And then I have to log into the portal and approve it. I get our other guys saying, hey, why are you trying to approve something? Any of the tools that I'm using on a day-to-day basis that haven't been in the environment during the whole learning mode initially, I could go through and set extensions and all that. So, while it's a headache on that end, the amount of saved time I can't even count. It is a little frustrating on my end since I like to go as quickly as I possibly can, and it slows me down. However, that's a really good thing.

Depending on the site, it can save a lot of time and cut down headaches. It's likely saved a week's worth of time. 

It's cut down the amount of sever help desk tickets. Those have become minimal. 

Identifying areas of improvement is challenging, however, perhaps adding a few more built-ins could help. There are items updated a couple of times a year, especially in the banking industry, where some applications could benefit from built-ins. While it's understandable why they aren't available, manually building rules and adding hashes takes extra time. Some built-ins are reportedly in progress and should eventually be available.

Unfortunately, I lack access to one component due to licensing requirements, however, it is what it is.

I have used the solution for almost two years now.

I have yet to encounter any problems with it, apart from end users complaining that they can't install whatever they want, which is exactly the desired outcome.

I have not had any issues at all. At one site, I started off with just the servers, and within a month and a half, I set up the entire company with ThreatLocker. I expanded from maybe ten to fifteen initial installs to well over one hundred in two weeks. It was super simple.

I joined a conference call with a colleague and asked a question. The detailed explanation provided by the representative was impressive, showing features I was unaware of. It encouraged me to explore the training materials in ThreatLocker University. 

I have been researching various options, and if I remember correctly, Kaseya recommended ThreatLocker. I have contacts at Kaseya, and there are ongoing discussions about new solutions. The suggestion to try ThreatLocker led us to run a trial, initially planned for thirty or ninety days. However, within two weeks, I decided to license it for the entire company due to its impressive performance.

The initial deployment took me about a day to figure out how to do the initial deployment correctly and it has been solid since. In terms of implementation, I have no complaints at all.

We've got data RMM that we can use to push it out. We can use the VSA RMM to push it out. We can push it via GPO. So it's super easy to do. The only time we have to manually install it is on systems that we haven't plugged into a network yet.

The return on investment is significant as I am now recommending it to all our clients, even those with just one or two servers. It keeps malware, Trojans, and ransomware at bay. It is a worthy investment, reducing management headaches and cutting down on hours for minimal investment.

We probably looked at about a dozen options.

Overall, I would rate it probably a nine out of ten. I don't like to give a perfect score if it doesn't directly benefit someone within the company. It should be a ten since I've had no problems with it, and it is as rock-solid as expected. 

The time saved from dealing with ransomware nonsense is invaluable. We spent about three weeks recovering from the last significant attack; however, since implementing ThreatLocker, management has been reduced to daily help desk tasks and server maintenance, saving our team thousands of hours.

When we assessed application whitelisting and ringfencing controls, we decided to sign on with ThreatLocker. The way we operate our business is that it is deployed across all our clients. Once we identified the benefits of application whitelisting, we knew it belonged in every client's setup, and we implemented it for all our clients.

When we adopted ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, there were frustrations among clients as everybody was learning and getting used to it. We were learning how to administer it, and our customers were learning what it was, but it ended up becoming a fantastic thing where we now get referrals from our customers to other companies. Over time, it transformed into a positive experience, leading to customer referrals and advocacy for ThreatLocker. Although some clients overstate it by claiming it makes them ransomware-proof, the product's impact is undeniable. The contributions of Ben and Garrett were pivotal in this success, resulting in enthusiastic customer recommendations.

It has not helped eliminate or consolidate any security tools or solutions. We do not see ThreatLocker as a replacement for any of the current base functionality of existing tools; we see it as augmenting it. We see it as something that is important to have. One of the philosophies at our company is that we do not believe there should ever be an all-in for any security product. There should always be a check and a balance in place. One of our main checks on ThreatLocker is Huntress, so we use them in combination. It is something that maintains a balance. They are not overlapping by any means. Even though ThreatLocker has an MDR product now, we are electing not to use it because we want to have a separation and those checks and balances in place.

We initially anticipated a reduction in ticket hours through elevation control, but rather than a decrease, over the years, the nature of the tickets changed. Instead of broad, permissive policies, we now focus on diligent policy creation, accompanied by an increase in technical costs. I do not see that as a negative. While it increased our overall technical costs on an average basis, the benefits that come with it make it completely worthwhile and something that I would recommend to every MSP.

It has not decreased help desk tickets. It has changed the nature of the tickets, and that is not a bad thing. It means that we are using ThreatLocker properly, and we are not making broad sweeping policies that are overly permissive. It requires us to do our job a little more diligently.

It has increased our operational costs, but it is entirely worth it to increase those operational costs.

It can block access to unauthorized applications. It is very dependent upon the implementation and the access that is allowed. If you are giving this to your technicians without the appropriate training, it can be dangerous and not helpful. It can be a false sense of security, but if you implement it properly and are willing to make the investment in training your team properly on how to manage ThreatLocker, it is fantastic.

It has changed what our IT team is working on. Instead of working on old-style things, such as GPO or CryptoLocker policies and reviewing enforcement and deployment of that GPO and linkage, they are now spending their time reviewing policies within ThreatLocker. There is a shift in focus, but it is far more worthwhile. Every hour that has been replaced with ThreatLocker time is a much more effective use of their time.

Application whitelisting is significant, though it may seem obvious. What sets ThreatLocker apart from competitors offering similar solutions is ringfencing. The ringfencing controls, along with the application elevation features, keep it out of the user's line of sight while still protecting them. This protection is unobtrusive but effective, as users are protected without their awareness. 

I find that the learning mode is too accessible. Technicians sometimes default to it instead of manually building policy controls. I would prefer the learning mode to be harder to access, ideally hidden behind a layer that requires creating at least one policy first before using the learning mode as a supplement. 

Because of the accessibility of things like the learning mode, it moves towards defeating the purpose. The level of learning and the processes required to use ThreatLocker properly is high. You require a very high-tech person to truly understand its in-depth nature. We have tried it with our junior techs, and they just default to throwing learning mode on everything. It is too easy and allows techs to push through things that they should not. When you are using it properly, it has a high learning curve and a high difficulty level.

It requires quality-of-life enhancements from an administrative perspective. Currently, there is a strong technical focus but less emphasis on the business aspects, such as billing and portal administration.

I believe we have been with ThreatLocker for about three years.

The platform's stability is solid, but I have concerns over their rapid expansion into areas like the endpoint solution acting as an EDR. They might be trying to become an all-in-one solution instead of focusing on their niche of augmenting other solid solutions. Companies like SentinelOne and Huntress have strong offerings, and ThreatLocker excels in complementing them instead of competing directly.

It is quite scalable. This scalability is partly due to our implementation strategy, where every client receives it without exception.

It has been fantastic. The feedback from our technicians working with Cyber Heroes has been positive, and my experience with our account managers, Ben, Lansard, and Garrett, has been exceptional. The service has been outstanding.

I would rate their customer support a ten out of ten.

Positive

We had no application whitelisting platform prior to ThreatLocker.

The agents are on-premises. The deployment of ThreatLocker agents has been very smooth and clean. Our challenge has been the maintenance of the accounts. As devices go offline and are retired, there are no automated falloff methods, and that has caused some challenges for us.

We had a sales engineer provided by the ThreatLocker team to assist us. I want to specifically acknowledge Garrett, our second sales engineer, who made the product work effectively and built our trust and confidence in ThreatLocker.

It is less about a tangible dollar return on investment and more about risk management and peace of mind for both our MSP and our clients. Feedback from technically inclined clients indicates that having this solution in place allows them and their teams to feel secure, helping us all sleep more soundly at night. For an MSP, it has been one of the most effective solutions.

We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients. After conversations with other partners, it became clear we underpriced it initially, which caused most of our issues, rather than any fault with ThreatLocker.

We evaluated multiple solutions beforehand such as SentinelOne, CyberFOX's AutoElevate solution, and others. We evaluated these options before adopting ThreatLocker and continue to reevaluate them annually, but ThreatLocker has consistently remained in our stack because they do it right. ThreatLocker stands out because they understand application whitelisting and elevation controls deeply, addressing real issues effectively.

A lot of companies get into application whitelisting and elevation control, but they lack a true understanding of the real issues and how to properly address them. ThreatLocker does a great job of knowing what they do well, and in a good way, staying in their lane and excelling at what they do. A lot of the other people who have similar products either are vastly overpriced or try to do it all. When you try to do it all, you end up not doing it all well. ThreatLocker excels in knowing its strengths and not overextending.

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. More emphasis on the business aspects, such as billing and portal administration, would push the rating to a ten.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform includes creating rules and approving software. Rule creation is mainly because ThreatLocker automatically creates blocks, so we create rules to allow legitimate software to be used in the company. Approvals occur when there is already a rule in place and we discover new software that needs to be allowed, so we go there and approve it.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has had a positive impact on my organization by greatly increasing the level of security and very quickly increasing control over which applications and software can be used within the organization, making it much more efficient in an agile way.

A practical example showing this increase in security is when we have new employees. We don't necessarily need to create rules one by one for the software that needs to be installed or not on that user's machine. Since there is a very high demand for new employees, each one already uses what is allowed by default and installs new software that is already granted through approval by IT. Over time, they can already have an autonomous way of knowing what they can use or not.

The best feature that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers is that it uses artificial intelligence and identifies which software is legitimate because it stays in a learning mode on the machine. We set it for a period of about two months, and that way, it automatically understands which software the user uses in their daily routine, creating customized rules for each user.

Regarding the AI features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I think the governance and security of these features are very good when they are well configured, and I also don't have much difficulty with configuration. I believe that is their strongest point.

Regarding the AI features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I think the accuracy and reliability of the results are good, but as with most software, there always has to be fine-tuning to achieve the best possible performance from the software.

Regarding the learning mode and the artificial intelligence, I believe what could be improved is having, from time to time, a configuration option to create a review for that user of new software that we could include more easily within the personalized rules for each user.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for a year and a half.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is very stable.

The customer support of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is good, and we have had few issues. I would rate customer support a ten.

We did not use a different solution before.

Before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, since my company is an IT solutions company that sells these products, we evaluated other options such as SentinelOne.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform an eight because I believe there is still a lot of room for improvement and a lot of evolution, and over time, I think there is still a lot for the software to improve. I would say it is very worthwhile to consider using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform because it is a very good platform, and if well tuned and well configured, it will make a big difference in your organization. My overall review rating for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is eight out of ten.

I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for application control to manage any applications coming in and out. When a user clicks on an application they are not supposed to be using or accidentally downloads something from a website, ThreatLocker blocks it automatically. I appreciate the zero trust approach. I have policies in place that specify which applications are allowed and how they can be used, with applications ring-fenced accordingly.

The application control feature works really well. When you run an application and it gets blocked automatically, it demonstrates the effectiveness of the solution.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helps our organization significantly with application control by determining what needs to be allowed and what needs to be blocked. It has made everything more secure and saves time. We do not have to rely on different application products for control since we use ThreatLocker and it works really well.

We have not yet explored additional capabilities, but we want to do so later.

Application control is the number one feature that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers. I do like the web filtering module, though we do not currently have it, but I want it. Web filtering appears to be effective, and since application control works really well, I assume the web filtering functionality has to be working equally well. All of this functionality runs on the ThreatLocker agent, so you do not have to have different modules from different companies.

Application control works really well on a day-to-day basis because we review applications based on our needs, and when new drivers come out, we know what we are allowing in our organization and what we are not allowing.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform can be used for good governance and security when it comes to application control. It has been very consistent, and its capabilities are very strong and good.

We have our own spreadsheet to determine which scripts are going to be allowed based on their policies with ThreatLocker.

We have not used ring fencing yet, but we want to in the future.

We do not actually use other modules right now. We just use application control.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform works great as it is, and I would not change anything.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for about four years now.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has met my needs.

Customer support for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is very great.

I did not have any application control solutions in place before.

I have not seen a return on investment.

I did not implement or do any renewals or licensing with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform. It was already set up when I arrived.

I did not evaluate other options because ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform was already set up when I arrived, so I just use it.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a ten. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform works really well, and it is one of those products that works super well, with everything about it being great. I would advise you to really look into ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and do your research on how great it is because it is perfect. My overall review rating for this product is 10.

I work for an architecture firm. We use ThreatLocker Protect to protect the company's systems from unknown malware by blocking unapproved applications. We encounter a lot of malware and ThreatLocker has been able to help with that.

As an architecture firm, we rely on TAISE’s Cybersecurity-as-a-Service (CaaS) to keep our systems safe from malware threats. TAISE introduced us to ThreatLocker, which has become essential in safeguarding our infrastructure by blocking unapproved applications and defending against unknown malware. Given our exposure to frequent malware, ThreatLocker, through TAISE's expert implementation, has proven invaluable

ThreatLocker Protect is very simple and easy to understand. You do not need much technical knowledge to be able to use it. It is very good. Anybody with a bit of IT knowledge is able to handle it.

Ringfencing adds an extra layer of defense. If an application is compromised, you can just exclude the computer and do your troubleshooting and find out what the problem was. It goes hand in hand with application whitelisting. It has been very helpful. It adds an extra security system which is very much needed for our infrastructure.

ThreatLocker Protect has improved my organization greatly. Before using ThreatLocker Protect, we experienced a malware attack that caused significant damage, corrupting many of our files. Since implementing ThreatLocker Protect, we have not faced any such issues, and our operations have been smooth.

We were able to realize its benefits immediately. No user can install any unknown applications or unauthorized applications on their own. I have been able to manage my systems effectively without any malware.

ThreatLocker Protect has reduced our help desk tickets by about 40%, as every software they use is approved by me before use, limiting unauthorized installations.

ThreatLocker Protect has freed up a lot of time. I do not have to do much with the help desk because our systems are protected with ThreatLocker Protect.

The application whitelisting feature allows us to block and manage approved applications effectively. It ensures that no one can install an application on our systems unless it is approved by me, which is very efficient.

It is very easy to use. When a user sends a request, you can go to the dashboard to view the application that the user wants you to approve. If you are okay with the application, you just click the Approve button to approve. It is very easy.

The support could be quicker. There are times when there is a delay in getting a response. This is problematic when immediate attention is needed.

The stability can also be better.

I have been using ThreatLocker Protect for the past three years.

Stability can be improved as there are times it goes down or requires management to adjust policies. I would rate stability a six out of ten.

It is scalable to an extent, depending on where it is used. I would rate scalability a seven out of ten.

We have one location but multiple departments. Overall, we have 25 users.

Our company is small. I know which applications each user is supposed to use and what they need. Once I get a request, I go over to the application they need to install. If it aligns with the work they do, I approve it.

I would rate their support a five out of ten. It could be better, especially with response times.

Neutral

We did not use another solution before.

The initial setup was straightforward. Its deployment took about a week.

Our return on investment with ThreatLocker is about 20%.

Its time to value was immediate.

The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost.

I would recommend ThreatLocker Protect to other users as it is a very important tool for IT administrators like me. It helps manage user access and secures the system efficiently.

I would rate ThreatLocker Protect an eight out of ten.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is application control.

I use application control with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform to avoid any malicious software being installed or any software outside the company's scope of workflow.

I work with the client to make sure that their policies are tailored to what they need and ensure that any sketchy software reported through requests is brought to the attention of the point of contact to either create a policy or reject it.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization by saving a ton of cleanup during a malicious attack, as it has stopped it in its tracks, and I was able to basically pinpoint the vector of attack if something were to happen.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helped me pinpoint the attack vector by tracing back the last request log for some software that seemed very sketchy, where I found that it had a malicious attachment to the email, so I was able to reject the request and then basically use my other software to perform scans to make sure that the company was okay to keep running.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I am unable to eliminate or consolidate any security tools or solutions due to my business model.

The best features that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers are definitely application control, storage control, and web control.

Out of application control, storage control, and web control, the feature that stands out to me as the most valuable in my day-to-day work is application control.

Regarding ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities, I think its governance and security are perfectly fine, as it blocks and has a bunch of built-in policies that will help curb the amount of information given out to AI.

I think ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's AI capabilities are very accurate, and I do not have an issue with it at all.

I think the solutions work out for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices, as the amount of built-in policies that they already have in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform helps me create these policies quicker.

I have used the Ring Fencing feature with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, and I think it works very well, as it stops network traffic from anywhere that I do not think is necessary and basically puts the power back in my hands.

I assess the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites as a 10 out of 10, as it does its best to detect anything that's outside the scope after learning mode, and then I can review it myself.

I have no suggestions on how ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform can be improved, as it works very well.

There are no improvements needed for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform that I have not mentioned yet.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for a little over five years.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

The scalability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is great, and customer support is fantastic.

I would rate the customer support of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform on a scale of one to 10 as a 10.

I did not previously use a different solution.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is deployed in my organization through my RMM software.

My RMM software is hosted in the cloud.

I use Datto as my cloud provider.

Before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I did not evaluate other options, as I used ThreatLocker when I was first hired here.

I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a 10 on a scale of one to 10.

I feel ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform deserves a 10 because they have been super helpful since the beginning when I was onboarding them and have been super helpful any time that I need support, and my clients love the software.

My advice to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to definitely demo it first and see how it works for you and definitely see the comfortability of the clients in waiting for their requests to be answered.

I have rated ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform a 10 overall.

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is the protection of our servers and endpoints from potential cyber threats.

A quick specific example of how I use it for protection is that it helps in whitelisting applications and ensures that only business applications are running on servers and endpoints, blocking any other services that are not whitelisted.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform also helps in reviewing threats detected and blocked by the platform in my environment.

The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers would be its capability of whitelisting known applications and in-house applications, and also in proactively blacklisting ones which are not utilized in our organization.

The allow-listing capability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform compared to other tools I've used before does give a sense of security for our organization when ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is working efficiently, and it also helps in making sure that our IT team and our security teams are well aligned in terms of whitelisting.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization by making sure that developers and other users do not utilize applications which are not allowed as per our IT policy.

It does help in ensuring that threats are reduced, the attack surface is reduced, and our team is not overwhelmed with too many alerts.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform serves its purpose effectively, and there is nothing much to highlight about how it can be improved at the moment.

I have been using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for the last three years.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is stable.

The scalability of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is straightforward, and we can scale up when required.

We have not required customer support for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

This is the first zero-trust solution we have implemented, and I did not previously use a different solution.

I have seen a return on investment with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform; I require about three fewer people in my team.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has saved on people costs since the application does the job.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is straightforward, and there are no issues.

I evaluated other options, specifically Zscaler and CrowdStrike, before choosing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform.

By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my organization has been able to consolidate certain features such as application control; I can use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform instead of application control on the firewall.

My impression of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's allow-listing feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it is most useful and is the main purpose of this application.

The efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites is very useful.

My advice to others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that you can look into a proof of concept before you buy. I give this solution a review rating of ten out of ten.

I primarily use it on servers. We deal with smaller customers, and they don't always have the money to get it on every endpoint. The main thing exposed to the internet is, of course, the server, RDP, and other functions. 

We have some customers that have it on the endpoint. In the past few years of using ThreatLocker, I haven't experienced ransomware on servers. However, there are small occurrences on endpoints when they're not using ThreatLocker.

With ThreatLocker, we don't have shadow IT, and it has reduced ransomware. 

We have a lot of companies concerned with compliance. They have an application list, and anything outside of that application list is not allowed. ThreatLocker makes that really easy for us since you just allow what they need, and no one can run anything else.

Ringfencing is a valuable feature. If someone gains access to something or some end user attempts to run malicious PowerShell commands to download malware, it simply doesn't allow it. It's like saying, I'm not permitted to reach out to this. 

ThreatLocker eliminates shadow IT and reduces ransomware. We have many companies that need compliance. They have an application list, and anything outside of that list is not allowed. ThreatLocker makes this easy by allowing only what we need, preventing us from running anything else. 

Previously, I used AppLocker, a Windows tool, which is a lot of work to manage. ThreatLocker reduced work, allowing us to hire fewer people for this job. The time saved from not having to do recovery when malware runs, which can't happen with ThreatLocker, also saves money.

It's fairly easy to use. It has a learning curve. However, if you go to the university, you should be fine. And if you don't know something, you can just click the chat button. You'll be chatting with someone in 30 seconds.

It reduces work. It helps us save on operational costs that way. You can hire fewer people or move people onto other stuff. People can be moved to other tasks. We likely save one FTE a year, so it saves us around 30,000 euros.

We can block access very well. They are doing their job. 

It reduces the amount of time a ticket takes to action. 

It doesn't really have to do with ThreatLocker as a company. It's really annoying when other companies don't sign their executables with a certificate, requiring new rules for new files. It would be beneficial if it became more recognized in the EU to gain respect. That's about the only issue I can think of.

I have used the solution for a little bit more than three years now.

It's really stable. Once deployed, it downloads the policies locally, so even if the computer doesn't have internet, it doesn't matter. It still works.

The scalability is great. I can put as many endpoints in it as I like.

The customer service is very good. If I need someone, I hit the chat button, and 30 seconds later, there is someone there to help me.

Neutral

I used the Windows built-in AppLocker, and that was it.

We use RMM to deploy the agent.

The initial setup had its ups and downs. That was all on us. We tried to roll it out for everyone at the same time. I'd advise against that.

I had a Solutions Engineer help me. He was from ThreatLocker.

I would estimate savings equivalent to one person per year, which is about 30,000 euros in our country. Not dealing with recovery when malware runs, as it can't run, saves a lot of time and money. The subscription includes help desk time, saving us even more.

The setup is quite cheap, considering what it does.

I didn't evaluate a different solution before choosing this one. Afterwards, I looked at Cyberfox for the elevation control, however, it was unsatisfactory.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

If something isn't working, you get a helpdesk ticket. If they don't know the answer, they escalate and eventually hop on a call with you without automatically closing tickets. It's been great. My Solutions Engineer has been fantastic. Even as he's moved up within the company, I can still call him.

We're a managed service provider, mostly dealing with small business office environments, so ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is used in the context of many different tools. It's a unification of several different tools. Their front and center is their Application Control, where I believe the older, less correct name for it would be application whitelisting. Basically, it ensures that nothing can run within a given environment. As long as the machine is protected by ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, nothing can run within an environment that is not considered kosher by the admin.

If you don't allow it, it doesn't run with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. It's as simple as that. I've had it block PowerShell scripts that my RMM has sent through. It's one of those things that in the moment, it's really annoying. However, the implication is that if that were anybody else, they wouldn't have been able to allow it.

I deal with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. It provides peace of mind because it unifies a lot of different tools, including managed detection and response and Endpoint Detection and Response.

The single pane of glass management for all this functionality is really the best feature. It unifies many utilities that would have been separate costs before, and it lets us sleep at night knowing that things are being monitored 24 hours.

The ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform auditing capabilities have provided valuable insights for us and have stopped several would-be malware infections.

Going with the theme of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform being a one-stop shop where they have just about everything, and they have a really good product stack as is. However, the one last thing I would want to see is mail security implemented similar to how Mail Protector does theirs, except obviously managed and included in a subscription tier with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

It's pretty easy to deploy as far as this functionality goes. However, it's very annoying to uninstall. You have to go into the online control panel and disable tampering for a device before it'll let you uninstall it without complaining really loudly. This is actually one of those things that is annoying in day-to-day operation because it assumes you don't know what you're doing. However, I would rather it let me know when it doesn't need to than have a situation where our protection is just being disabled and nothing's being done about it.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a nine. There's a little bit of smoothing they could do, but most of my annoyances with it are with the concept as a whole and there's not really anything anyone can do to fix them. It comes with the territory. It's not really something that they in particular could improve upon.

I have dealt with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for a couple of years at this point.

The support with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is phenomenal. Utterly phenomenal. I literally don't think I have ever waited more than a minute to hear back.

Positive

We've been Blackpoint customers for MDR, EDR before ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. They did not offer the Application Control or the network control, the storage control. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform added the MDR, EDR functionality as a logical extension of what they do with the application whitelisting, with the network control, with the storage control. It was just a logical extension. But Blackpoint only ever offered the MDR, EDR functionality. And as far as I know, they were only just starting to branch out into Application Control before we moved over to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform.

The zero-trust approach of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped us pass certain certifications for cybersecurity. The zero-trust portion means that it's a little more annoying than traditional security software. However, you know for a fact that it's working because you can watch it stop stuff in real-time.

I do use the Application Control feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. It is about as straightforward as you could hope for a tool. They offer many deployment options. They have an agent installer you can download. They have a deployment script that you can push through your RMM, or through a Group Policy type implementation.

I'm not very familiar with the pricing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform. I don't look at the numbers typically as I focus on technological aspects and implementation. From what I understand, our licensing costs are actually fairly reasonable. For the tier we're at now, it's approximately $10 an endpoint, and we're easily able to upsell that. We're covering our costs and then a little bit on top. It's such a useful tool that if I were making the decision, I would probably even sell it at a loss and take a little bit of a chunk out of other managed service profit margins if necessary. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is just that useful.

The way Ringfencing helps limit application actions is by allowing an application to run. However, that application is not allowed to talk to certain common threat vectors such as scripting hosts, PowerShell, macros, etc. That's how it's configured by default. You can configure it however you want. For example, I could stop Chrome from talking to Word if needed.

I rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a nine out of ten.

We're currently deploying 15,000 machines. For us, it is quite easy, however, the problem is that our environment is complicated to deploy due to many customizations. That said, with ThreatLocker, it is not a problem. 

It's getting better in terms of cost and transparency. We can see security improving and can show our evolution. 

The control list is the best feature. For our company, it provides value to our customers since they can see we are improving our security. It also helps us understand what is happening in the machines with notify audits. The solution shows evolution and helps us troubleshoot, even when installed on only some machines.

We can reduce attack surface. We have over 1500 sysadmins, and without it, it was hard to control permissions.

We hope in the future it will help us reduce costs.

We can block access to unauthorized applications. With all of the sysadmins, it had been quite difficult to block everything manually. We have more control over our environment now.

It helps us to see what's happening in the environment and can help us troubleshoot. Once we install across all machines, we can see better what's happening. 

There could be options for handling a bulk amount of machines simultaneously. Randomizing the actions instead of executing everything at once would be beneficial. This would apply to our policies, particularly for the container and Linux versions.

We have been using it for about one year and six months, almost two years.

I have encountered some problems with stabilitiy, however, they are resolved quickly. It is not really a significant issue for me, as they are solved very fast.

The scalability is okay for us. We do not have any problems.

The customer service is very good and very fast.

Neutral

Previously, we used another solution, including a solution from ManageEngine. We switched to ThreatLocker because we felt secure using it, especially with Cyber Heroes and the learning mode.

The implementation was done in-house by me.

We are seeing a return on investment, especially with our managers and customers. We are protecting them and enhancing our security. They all feel safer with this solution.

The setup cost is good, but money in Brazil is quite expensive. Despite the Brazilian economic issues, it is manageable when considering the dollar.

We just have one alternate solution in mind, which includes control mechanisms. We tested some others but liked this one a lot. We need to finish the first part.

My overall product rating is nine out of ten.