It also helps you with access, like we have dark web monitoring and admin protection management. So, the use cases can vary from organization to organization, but every organization has different value in it.

It helps to prevent unauthorized access or identity theft from external sites. If your identity is stolen, you can ban it.

Real-time monitoring is important because it runs multiple things on a single platform, like IDA, EDR, XDR, and SIM solutions. It captures all technology with one agent, which makes it easier for us to fix customer issues. 

Having a single console is helpful, especially when customers have multiple vendors for their products. It's easier to manage one partner. In this case, CrowdStrike Falcon helps.

One thing that is not yet available is attack simulation. For example, if someone tries to attack your Active Directory on inactive accounts, a cyber attacker could hack those accounts and try to get into your company. This could be a feature to add. It would give a fake reply each time someone tries to hack it. Multiple companies that I know of would like that.

I have been using it for two years. 

It is a stable product.

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten.  It's a scalable solution that is very easy to deploy.

It is suitable for every kind of business, including small, medium, or enterprise businesses.

Technical support depends on a system integrator.

CrowdStrike technical support regarding Identity Protection has a team, but if there's no issue with the agent, you can work it out yourself.

The support is good.

Positive

The initial setup is easy. We only have one option available right now: on the cloud. It gets applied to endpoints, but it's cloud-based.

It is very easy to integrate this product into our existing environment.

It's a premium product.

From my end, it works. But it can be recommended or viewed by a personal customer. We are not the sole user of CrowdStrike Falcon. It's the end user.

I would recommend using it. For me, it is the best product ever. Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.  

We use the solution for Windows and non-Windows infrastructure. We have Falcon clients on all our machines.

We integrate with CyberArk, which includes DNA reporting, particularly for identifying old and ticket-based attacks. We’ve implemented this integration to receive risk-based scoring. Our strategy focuses on preventing privilege escalation, as our last major incident, NotPetya, resulted from this vulnerability. To address this, we’ve implemented measures through CyberArk and CrowdStrike.

When we encounter phishing attacks via email, we sandbox any reported items. Whenever a suspicious email is reported, we conduct sandboxing in CrowdStrike and block emails, domains, and IPs based on the resulting threat intelligence.

The most critical aspect is preventing privilege escalation, particularly for domain admins with the highest credentials. With our integration of CyberArk, passwords are never transmitted to the endpoint. Instead, a secure RDP file is created, and Falcon is used to prevent privilege escalation attempts.

As customers, we always update our systems whenever a new release is available, with clients connecting directly to the Internet for these updates. We have an agent who manages these updates on the clients, but as an organization, we don’t have control over them. CrowdStrike should assess the impact on endpoints before releasing such updates.

Our organization now seeks AI-based stock monitoring to prioritize thousands of alerts generated across various platforms. The AI integration is still in its early stages, so we would like to see Falcon develop tools that can integrate with multiple platforms and help identify the highest-priority alerts.

I have been using CrowdStrike Falcon Threat Intelligence since 2017. We are using the latest version of the solution.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

The integration part is very good. CrowdStrike collaborates with most security vendors, so it's very easy to get one platform for our risk factors across the enterprise.

40 thousand devices are using this solution. We get many alerts from Falcon, sometimes from end users and sometimes from Internet-facing servers.

I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten.

We struggle to get specialized resources from CrowdStrike in a few cases.

Neutral

CrowdStrike Falcon Black is an on-premise solution that was very complicated, so we faced performance issues. The main reason for the switch is the performance issues reported by multiple application owners.

Initially, we faced many challenges because we had to open ports from each of our subnets to Falcon, as it’s a SaaS solution. Each client needs to communicate with Falcon servers for threat intelligence. Due to the complexity of our network, we had to carefully consider all security aspects when opening the external communication ports to Falcon.

It took 25 to 30 days to deploy it completely.

We began with our Tier 0 servers, which had the most critical and highest privileges. After securing those, we moved on to Tier 1 and Tier 2 as we continued deployment. Our approach was to first address the highest risk factors across the enterprise and then gradually move on to securing endpoints like user desktops and laptops.

I rate the initial setup as seven out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

We took professional services from CrowdStrike, so it was done in-house with only two people: one from the execution team and one from the cybersecurity team.

When we track the annual priority cases, especially the security incidents, we have made many improvements. That is ROI in terms of tracking security incidents.

I rate the product’s pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Most customer requirements focus on email security, so we’ve implemented Mimecast. CrowdStrike Falcon integrates with Mimecast, allowing us to provide advanced security beyond Office 365’s capabilities. With DMARC in place, Falcon helps us identify domains that pose a risk to the organization.

I advise you to look for customer feedback, and then they should also look for Gartner and other industry leaders so you get the ranking.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I used the tool since my company wanted a product with next-generation antivirus and EDR, as it can help with the detection of malicious activities and behavior detection, and the MI and machine learning part in the tool also helps.

Only for the customized IOCs, there is a need to highlight certain aspects, and based on it, we get to block only the hash values but is not based on the file name, like .exe, or other extensions, so I can't block them, making it in an area where the solution needs to improve.

My company had raised a concern with CrowdStrike's support team when one of the antivirus applications that communicates with CrowdStrike started misbehaving. For both the aforementioned tools, the same support ticket had to be raised. If my company had to provide any suggestions regarding the whitelisting part, there was a delay of over a month when dealing with the product's support team. If the tool's support team suggests users follow certain steps, and if it is not followed or is not in progress, then after two or three days, the tool's support team needs to join a video call and provide a resolution to the users.

Some policies in the tool need to be fine-tuned. Customized IOCs need to be improved since they have certain shortcomings. With the customized IOCs, it can be made possible to block a file extension with a filename or file extension type of blocking. Providing users with the ability to customize policies would be a good improvement to the solution.

I have been using CrowdStrike Falcon Threat Intelligence for a year. I am a user of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My company's cybersecurity and IT security team use the tool. In my company, there are 15,000 users. For servers, there are 1,500 users.

Right now, there is no need to increase the usage of the tool.

The solution's technical support is not good. I rate the technical support a four to five out of ten.

Neutral

I have experience with Palo Alto.

The detection and other functionalities in CrowdStrike and Palo Alto are the same, but cost-wise, CrowdStrike is reasonable. Technically, I would prefer Palo Alto over CrowdStrike.

The product's deployment phase is easy. I rate the setup phase of the tool as a ten on a scale where one is difficult and ten means it is an easy process.

The solution can be deployed in the cloud and on an on-premises model.

The solution can be initially deployed in a minute.

Considering the number of users, servers, cloud, and on-premises environment, it hardly takes 15 to 20 days. When there are laptop and desktop users who are online, and there is a need to install the agent, then there can be some issues, and with such minor things, ten days are more than enough for the installation.

CrowdStrike is a reasonably priced tool.

In terms of the ability of the tool to deal with threats, I would say that the product does it by around 85 percent.

The real-time response of the tool is good, and I feel it is around 90 to 95 percent.

The tool's incident-handling capability is good.

Considering the influence of the product on our company over some time, I would say that the solution is cost-effective and offers good threat detection features. The tool's interface is also good.

The tool's AI features are good, but they are not useful for our company since the area of detection is not something in our bucket right now.

If you have a big budget, go with Palo Alto. If you have a low budget and want a tool that provides more accuracy during detection, then it is better to go with CrowdStrike.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.