LOL on the error message.
Thats typical them.
Just got an email asking to rate their service by clicking on a face icon.
I did and got an error says The survey link is invalid.
I am still waiting for a response.
We have given up and are moving on.
@melih
Your customers are giving up on you. Time for you to step it up.
we have a new management team recently taken over and fixing all these @SmartCloud . We all know the security Xcitium offers unparalled and its a shame that some customers will actually take higher risk and go with a competitor because of other issues. We MUST resolve them asap!
Would you please list all the issues you see, so that I can raise it with the new management team asap?
thank you!
@melih I think we all appreciate the value a product like Xcitium brings to the table. At least for me, it seems the issues with branding inconsistency (Xcitium, Comodo, and Itarian) and a lack of transparency in pricing are the biggest immediate concerns. We pay for Xcitium, but even the software has an identity crisis with processes being named as Comodo. I can only imagine how complicated rebranding a product as integrated as this can be, but it’s gotta be done.
You can have the greatest product in the world, but if you can’t market it consistently, no one will trust it, and no one will use it. Pick a brand, and get everyone on the same page. Find a pricing structure that works, and that you can advertise. Can you still work with people and companies to flex on the pricing model? Sure, but having a starting point of reference gets more people ‘in the door’ and talking to your sales team to make those deals happen.
I hope others will chime in and bring their concerns to the table as well. This is a great product and I’d hate to see it go by the wayside.
I wish you good luck but we are moving. Frankly you dont deserve our business.
I have asked so many times now why we are paying $7,68 per device?
Why are we with Xcitium and not with Itarian?
Why dont you have transparent pricing?
You should hire people who actually has worked in the MSP industry so they understand what we need.
Bad service and dumb prices is why we are leaving. Your rant trying to shame us for wanting better service is unacceptable. Why should we stay with your poor service and pay 3 times more than your competitors?
Just tell us why?
Here is a comment for a user.
The only thing I did was to uninstall Xcitium security. You know the one that you are shaming us from stop using.
"I’ve been meaning to tell you, whatever you did Friday before last has sped my computer up at least 50%, both on boot up and multitasking. I asked others here and they said the same thing.?
Also, let me add this.
One of the 12.x versions where so bad we had a client uninstall of them and replace them without even telling us. That does not look good for us.
For real melih you need more employees at Xcitium
At Comodo forums you have so many employess but at Xcitium forums you have 3 admins and 3 mods thats really low employyes you need more employyes
if you have more Employees at Xcitium it will take a short time to fix the issues but if you have 3 or 4 Employees it will take longer to fix bugs
just deleted 77 devices and will do a few more over the weekend.
Reason is that we have a 80 device license that expires in a few days. Since we can’t get anyone to give us a reasonable rate we are removing them before we are ready. We had planned to do the testing of the competitors over a few months but we are not willing to pay $7.68 per device.
Its pathetic that Xcitum can’t handle issues like that, its so bad I cant even image why this is even an issue.
You came to the forum and responded then didnt come back.
Why?
Melih didnt even come back to respond after he posted in this thread.
Its like the company is out of business or on its last leg.
Cant even get pricing right. Who in their right mind will pay $7.68 per month per device for Xcitiums basic service.
Xcitium is working on their free version Comodo Internet Security and they published CIS 2025 yesterday so maybe thats why they are out of business
The ones who want “Zero Trust” and don’t want to play russian roulette with their security!
The ones who understand legacy products allow breach when their detection fails.
The ones who want to be protected even when detection fails.
Xcitium is the ONLY Zero Trust platform for endpoint security that is usable and works and also is transparent and Audited by indepedent third parties.
We are here for our customer as always. We are listening and doing our best to accomodate everyone.
You are not the only that has great security.
Why are you charging us $7.68 while your price sheet is something different.
We have been a paying customer long before you even forced licenses.
If you are so great then why dosnt the industry embrace you?
Instead Itarian/Xcitium isnt even mentioned in the MSP world?
We are the only one with Zero Trust on endpoint with automatic containment using Kernel API Virtualization.
Industry does embrace us, look at the Certifications we have! No other cybersecurity vendor has these certifications for Transparency.
So the question is: Why aren’t other Vendors Transparent?
Why don’t they trust you with the information and hide things from you while they happily take your money?
Melih, when will we see research and forward publications from Xcitium Intelligence?
Microsoft, shares Threat lab posts, alerts, etc
RecordedFuture, shares intelligence reports
Watchtowr, shares CVE’s/PoC’s etc.
While XCITIUM can have the technology to say “Yes, we catch everything”, attackers and defenders expect to see the hamster wheel spinning so to speak, as to HOW well you understand those threats and thus how well we can expect you to account for them. What threats you see, how you track them, how you learn from them, etc.
Yes, I’m glad XCS has “Kernel API Virtualization”, but I’d also love to know/see appropriately tested thru engineering things like “a polymorphic, obfuscated, encrypted reverse shell generator”. When you showcase your capabilities to stop what some may consider an “advanced” threat, then you have that justification that carries further for your organization. If, by the way, “Kernel API Virtualization” truly is the defensive end-all threat-containment-wise, how many red-teamers are currently on, the XCITIUM team? If you’ve indeed created a “standard” of technology for blue team work, the only thing left to do IS break it. If you can’t break it? Hire a firm like ours, like any other software evaluation and research firm out there that will have, a fresh perspective, fresh eyes, and fresh tactics that you simply can’t mentally, bring into frame, because you’ve never considered them. Security research is, in that aspect, incredibly unique - I cannot stress this enough.
Please reconsider the voice you’re interacting here with. We’ve all seen the Threat Labs page, you felt the need to attach arrows pointing at the two badges. We get it, “the numbers show”. That doesn’t, however, reflect a level of intelligence present within the product. It may be, a reflection of efficacy, but remember that cybersecurity is always going to be in some form or variation an endless game, on SOMEONE’s part - outside of the records of efficacy, there is no background context in the intelligence of oversight. There is no way, to see into the future, and no way to measure YOUR ability to attempt to, AS a consumer, ON a consumer’s behalf.
For example, with AI entering the workforce, what features are coming to XCS to stop enterprise data leaks to AI, track AI agent usage, etc. These are serious threats to data privacy as an employee can indeed just, dump whatever they wish into any of these chatbots - and no, you cannot just say “it’s already addressed” by “mixture of components” because what a consumer, will want, enterprise or otherwise, is a specific toggle that makes it evident, AI controls are present and enabled.
I almost, and you know what you can prove me wrong, tag when you do and I’ll admit I was wrong, but I nearly guarantee that Falcon will have dedicated “AI Controls” before XCS does - because somebody was a step ahead when they took the security perspective about LLM’s and went “oh shit, this is going to be a PROBLEM”
The quality of a security product is, not only measured by its ability to protect, but also its usability in protection. There are still various instances while where XCS may be delivering, high quality protection, it feels functionally like a Toyota Corolla that’s about to lose a wheel…Users will experience this, administrators may experience this, and that is what is the consumer’s perception to develop - not yours to invalidate by saying “but the security…” yeah, the security’s great, but XYZ behavior. I encourage, deeply, someone on your team to dedicate a couple hours to just screwing the hell out of a computer after installing XCS and experiencing different variations of configuration - it’s not always a fantastic time.
also, FIX THE SIGNING CERT IT STILL SAYS COMODO SECURITY SOLUTIONS THAT SHOULD BE A PRIORITY IF YOU’RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO REBRAND???
One last thing. This homepage? Someone needs to redo it, for the simple fact that it is a lockout.
Your thoughts?
Being Transparent is the only way to establish trust.
Xcitium has chosen to share its historical data publicly and as per https://cybertransparencyforum.org/ guidelines, it has its historical data audited and certified by two indepedent auditor.
Data Statistics | Xcitium
You are right, our marketing needs more help, we are working on it, but priority is our customer’s security!
Question you should be asking: Why other Cybersecurity vendors while taking your money, not being transparent and getting their historical data audited like Xcitium has?
It feels like you may be missing the point of the conversation, as well as everyone’s points of frustration.
We’re not questioning the integrity of the product, or the “transparency” you are providing. The transparency people are asking for is with your pricing models, and with your brand identity crisis. We’re not asking questions about other products. We’re asking questions about YOUR PRODUCT. Stop deflecting, please.
I’m very thankful you’re taking the time to interact and converse with us, but if you’re not listening/reading what the concerns are… what’s the point?
Thanks for the post.
There are misconceptions that I can’t simply respond to, as it doesn’t make sense…
this for example:
in a zero trust architecture, whether its polymorphic or obfuscated etc doesn’t matter, its Zero Trust. Its not like legacy “detection testing” stuff the legacy people do.
So you can’t evaluate Zero Trust by analyzing polymorphic or obfuscated or encrypted malware.
The poster with this request is raising the issue of “validation” and in his own way suggesting tests with polymorphic viruses etc. This type of validation method is old school and doesn’t really apply to Zero trust. As a result, i thought the best answer would be to re emphasize Transparency and how we are transparent and other are not.
As to the other point that was raised re: branding: I did respond agreeing the the poster
I observed 2 issues (Validation and Marketing) from that post and tried to answer it as best as I can.
Of course I might have missed something, please do help me by pointing out so that I can answer further. Grateful for your time as well!
thanks!
After talk with regional sales manager got a good discount, now the new price is X2, so I would live with that.
