Claroty xDome Security Platform

We are a proposal team and normally use these products for our network security solution proposals. We propose it to our customers, mainly in the Singapore region, as our Singapore affiliate is primarily using Claroty Platform .

All of our end users are oil and gas companies, including refineries and petrochemical complexes.

Unless we use Claroty Platform  hands-on, I will not be able to provide specific insights, because we are more of a budgeting or proposal team, normally dealing with issues like warranties and pricing. When it comes to actual technical usage, that is a different team.

Our customers buy the solution from us; we give a solution instead of them purchasing directly from Claroty Platform or the AWS  marketplace.

More modularity would be helpful for Claroty Platform to improve its competitiveness.

It is on and off. For the last three to four years, we are hearing about Claroty Platform quite often.

There are no stability issues at the moment.

There are no scalability issues.

I would suggest contacting our engineering, as we are from the proposal team and don't have hands-on experience using these products, including Claroty Platform.

Support-wise, they have no issues according to what we hear from them.

The pricing is discouraging. We get inclined towards cost-effective options because of the overall project scenario. Network security is a big component nowadays in an overall project.

Our different execution team is there to handle it, but overall, the product is pretty easy to deploy and integrate with the existing system.

The subscription durations are higher, and the prices are also more competitive compared to Claroty Platform.

Regarding pricing, alternative solutions have more flexibility in subscriptions regarding the number of years, and we can customize them much better.

Alternate solutions are popular in my region, but they are quite a costlier option.

Claroty Platform is quite professional, and I would rate it an eight out of ten.

My clients are using the Claroty Platform  for asset identification, finding CVEs and threat intel.

I am aware of the continuous threat detection feature of the Claroty Platform , and even if it is good to have, because my clients cannot solve it, they just focus on network segmentation and keep it that way. It is good to have, but they are not able to use it effectively for OT devices. They are using it effectively for Windows and other machines in the environment.

The Claroty Platform has been deployed as an OS, making it very easy to deploy the tool. There is not a lot of technical knowledge required. There are clear configuration guidelines, and when you go on the site and implement it, it is very easy to complete.

Regarding the cons of the Claroty Platform, it is not about the deployment, but rather the identification. The Claroty Platform becomes too noisy when it gives numerous CVEs related to vendor match. Sometimes, these CVEs are not actually related to the device in the firmware at the site.

The Claroty Platform identifies effectively but sometimes identifies many CVEs which might not be the actual issue in certain scenarios.

I have deployed different versions for around three to four years. I am not continuously using it.

The maintenance of the Claroty Platform is straightforward. Their support team is really good.

The way the Claroty Platform has considered and included the active scanning part has made it quite scalable.

Their support team is really good.

I can rate support for the Claroty Platform from one to ten as eight to nine.

Their support for the Claroty Platform is excellent.

I install Tenable.ot  in addition to deploying the Claroty Platform.

If we compare the Claroty Platform with Tenable, there are significant differences, as detection of the Claroty Platform is much better than Tenable.

The collaborations that Claroty has with numerous OEMs and OT vendors make the passive scanning of the Claroty Platform far better than Tenable.

It depends on cost-benefit analysis. If my infrastructure is critical infrastructure, the Claroty Platform saves time and resources. If my infrastructure is a very low-cost manufacturing where production stopping for half an hour does not impact much, then the Claroty Platform becomes costly. For critical infrastructure, it provides significant cost-benefit and saves substantial money.

I would agree that the solution is expensive. That is one issue that the Claroty Platform has.

I would rate the pricing of the Claroty Platform from one to ten around seven to eight.

I am using the Claroty Platform but not using Armis .

They might be able to integrate AI into the Claroty Platform when they are creating attack vectors.

I have had a very good experience with the Claroty Platform. If implemented properly, it works effectively, so I would rate it around eight to nine out of ten.

We have two use cases. One is for OT cybersecurity in our industrial environment, and the other is for cybersecurity solutions for our IoT and IoT devices in our hospital.

There are two main features which really distinguish the product. The first is the protocol support for industrial protocols. They offer the most support available.

Additionally, their SRA solution, the Secure Remote  Access solution, is very useful for industrial environments. They also have an office in the region with their own sales and support team, and we have our own trained team to manage the first level of support.

If more AI features could be included with the Clarity solution, it would be feasible for everybody. As AI is booming now, there are concerns about AI security.

There should be AI security solutions implemented. This should be a priority for vendors as they invest in AI-enabled solutions because AI security is a concern for everyone.

I have been using it for almost two years.

Until now, based on our experience, we have had no performance issues at all.

The solution did scale well.

Customer service is number one and the best.

There were two scenarios where people were using other solutions, such as Nozomi. They faced many pain points with Nozomi. During the POC with Clarity, the client was amazed by the performance and the difference between Clarity and Nozomi and Traverse. They decided to replace their Nozomi system with Clarity. For one Miami customer, they also used Nozomi yet lacked proper visibility solutions with the detection.

The initial setup is straightforward and not complex at all.

We follow a self-process. As soon as we find an opportunity, we present our solution and arrange technical presentations. Then we conduct a POC or POV and proceed accordingly.

There are various cases we've shared with our clients, and it always results in a positive way.

The cost is as per the standard market. It is neither too high nor too low. The pricing is similar to Nozomi and DriveWell.

I have not worked directly with Nozomi but have encountered them as a competitor in our market. Their advantage is that they entered the Middle East market early, which is why they have a good number of installations.

We have tried others, but unfortunately, their performance was not as good. Performance was better with Claroty. One should always check performance, protocol availability, and quick response time, which is a key strength when comparing Clarity with other vendors.

I rate the overall solution eight out of ten.

I believe the two main aspects where Claroty stands out are their ability to provide a complete platform and their OT-specific focus. They offer threat detection, asset management, vulnerability management, and remote access, which makes them the sole vendor in the OT security space to offer all three services. This is a significant advantage for them. Additionally, their network mapping capabilities are impressive, as they allow users to view a full map of all communications within a site or factory. This feature is highly valued by many of our customers.

I think the only issue is that the hardware Claroty uses is expensive. I know they are working on developing cheaper hardware, but that's still a work in progress.

I have used the solution for two years. However, I worked at Claroty, so while I know the product by heart, I was not a customer. I was on the vendor side.

I think the customer service is good. I have always found Claroty's technical support to have good engineers. The service differs by location due to their global customer base, with some places being more challenging. Overall, I think they provide good service. I haven't used them as a customer, as they were my peers, so it's hard to judge completely.

Claroty's pricing is highly competitive. I cannot discuss details, but I am aware of the pricing strategies of other platforms in this space. One unique aspect of Claroty is that users get all the deployments for free. These projects can be comprehensive and complex, often requiring hardware deployment, which takes time. Other vendors charge for technical account management and support hours during deployment, but Claroty provides these services for free, offering significant value.

I would give it a nine out of ten. Nobody is perfect, but I think Claroty is a very good platform. I have been advising in this space, and I am frequently asked if I recommend them. My answer is definitely yes.

I use the Claroty Platform  to protect our operational technology (OT) environment. It is designed as an OT Security Operations Center (SOC) tool and provides secure remote access, integrating with both legacy and current systems without burdening the network's bandwidth.

The Claroty Platform  ensures security without imposing significant delays. It boosts productivity while allowing secure remote access to engineers through advanced methods.

The platform ensures security without imposing significant delays. It boosts productivity while allowing secure remote access to engineers through advanced methods. It provides seamless integration with legacy systems and supports both passive and active reconnaissance. The ability to detect and classify assets, assess vulnerabilities, and manage patches and updates effectively is highly beneficial.

There is room for improvement in the user interface to make it more vibrant and interactive, similar to IT tools. Improvements could also be made in the Secure Remote  Access (SRA) user interaction and graphical representations of recordings. Additionally, reducing the overall cost of hardware and software solutions would be beneficial.

I have been using the Claroty Platform for about three years.

The platform runs with minimal delays and effectively manages workloads without intruding on the network, indicating a stable performance.

The Claroty Platform offers a scalable solution that accommodates both cloud and on-premise deployments, integrating seamlessly with existing infrastructure and supporting legacy systems.

The support is prompt, and the technical team provides training and assistance as required. Despite time zone differences causing slight delays, their response and support are effective and proactive.

I have used other products like Honeywell Amir, Nozomi, Vervetek, and others, but I found Claroty to be more rugged and suited for enterprise environments.

The initial setup requires certain certifications, which ensure a smooth integration process with Claroty's support.

The implementation was supported by a team from Claroty, ensuring compliance with required certifications for deployment.

The cost of the Claroty Platform is comparatively high, however, the ruggedness and comprehensive security features justify the investment.

Other solutions I evaluated include Honeywell Amir, Nozomi, Vervetek, and others.

Based on my experience, I would rate the overall solution eight out of ten.

Claroty provides a robust solution for OT environments, though improvements in user interface and cost are recommended.