Comment Re:I am the Chief Research Officer of Cylance (Score 1) 32
AV companies actually use ML to identify trends and then use that information to build heuristic signatures. You are correct we do use it on the endpoint where they use ML on the back end in their clouds, but the difference is, when a files runs or is blocked from execution, it's due to the score that the ML generates when the file is going to execute, if you are on the internet or not, you get the same level of protection, and aren't forced to update signatures two times a day, and it doesn't matter if it's a new variant of an existing piece of malware or something brand new that you wrote yourself, we are analyzing the binary itself, rather than searching it for static indicators, then saying "yup, this matches one, it must be malware". We actually extract over 4.5 million features from every file to feed the ML, and every decision relies on a combination of hundreds or thousands of features, before we call it malicious.
I don't know if it's artisanal, but its certainly farm to table and fair trade.
Cylance and traditional AV work differently and inherently have different strengths and weaknesses. As I said in my post, test for yourself, you can't just assume that something is the same, or different, or better, or worse. We are new and different, and I would strongly recommend reaching out to someone thats running our product and asking them their experience over a month or six months or a year. I think you'll be surprised at how happy people are with our tech, or reach out get a copy for yourself and goto town testing it.
I will say this, I had the opportunity to test Cylance almost 4 years ago, prior to commercial release, and I was so impressed I asked them for a job, it was easy to see that the approach Cylance was using was going to be the winner. If you want to stop malware you have to do it pre-execution, otherwise you open yourself up to way too many attacks that can subvert your protections, Cylance is the only tech that focuses on not letting malware run.
I don't know if it's artisanal, but its certainly farm to table and fair trade.
Cylance and traditional AV work differently and inherently have different strengths and weaknesses. As I said in my post, test for yourself, you can't just assume that something is the same, or different, or better, or worse. We are new and different, and I would strongly recommend reaching out to someone thats running our product and asking them their experience over a month or six months or a year. I think you'll be surprised at how happy people are with our tech, or reach out get a copy for yourself and goto town testing it.
I will say this, I had the opportunity to test Cylance almost 4 years ago, prior to commercial release, and I was so impressed I asked them for a job, it was easy to see that the approach Cylance was using was going to be the winner. If you want to stop malware you have to do it pre-execution, otherwise you open yourself up to way too many attacks that can subvert your protections, Cylance is the only tech that focuses on not letting malware run.