We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security and HP Wolf Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"This is stable and scalable."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"When it comes to the web, according to our customers, this product stands out due to its superior performance compared to others."
"The cloud console is good and the tool is effective in protection."
"The product provides a single dashboard."
"The domain integrator functionality is particularly noteworthy, allowing me to leverage my existing network infrastructure."
"The most valuable features of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security are remote administration and deployment, comprehensive firewall protection, malware protection, and antivirus."
"The most valuable feature is the IDS."
"Security for malware and threats is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is very scalable."
"Now, instead of us having to go through that analysis, they actually give us a monthly report that shows us: "Here's what you got hit with, here's what would have happened, here are the forensics behind the attack," and, obviously, Bromium stopped it."
"I use HP Wolf Security to add a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments."
"The most valuable feature is the process isolation because it simply stops malware from infecting the machines."
"It has prevented thousands of potential threats by encapsulating them within its own vSentry container, thus providing overall protection and integrity of the operating system."
"The feature that stands out the most is that when someone clicks on a link in an email... [if] that link is malicious and it has some malware or keylogger attached to it, when it opens up in that Bromium virtualized browser, there's no chance of it actually being on the machine and running, because as soon as they click that "X" in the upper right-hand side of the browser, everything just vanishes. That is an added plus."
"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack. We continue to have less user impact through a significantly reduced amount of malware infections. It's become a non-event."
"We've been able to isolate and prevent malicious code from external email attachments and from downloaded internet files. Those are the two big areas that have really made an impact."
"The isolation feature is the most important because it prevents attacks."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The solution's stability could be better."
"The lack of detecting security threats and high memory usage need to be improved."
"Potential areas for improvement could be more accessible and immediate support for critical situations, especially considering the regulatory challenges in healthcare."
"The risk management tool does not have reporting, which I feel to be a huge mistake."
"Overall, Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is quite good. It always has new features which customers can use for free, so I can't say that something is missing in the solution, though one area for improvement is that the cloud version of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security still can't connect to a central SIEM. The on-premises version has that capability, but the cloud version doesn't."
"The initial setup should be made easier."
"The dashboard can be improved."
"They've got all this training that's available, but it involves stuff that doesn't really encompass the solution as a whole."
"I did not find this to be an out-of-the-box solution, it required planning and alignment across many groups."
"After a major release, there's always a lot of "dust settling." You have to work through all those issues and then you're fine for a while. The problem is, it's stable, it's fine, until the next major release comes out. Then you go back into the cycle again of uncertainty, instability, working through issues until they have patched and remediated all the problems that you're having. It's not unlike any other vendor though"
"They have always struggled with usability. The protection that it offers you is tremendous, but there's definitely an impact with use of resources on the computer. It's gotten a lot better now with Win 10. But sometimes, when you open up a website, it's going to take longer than it would without Bromium, and it's the same with documents."
"Initial setup was complex. There were many configurations that needed to be worked out with the vendor. The setup required hands-on assistance from Bromium."
"Reporting is one of the shortcomings of the product. We do mine the data that's in there from a forensics perspective... It becomes very difficult because you have to spend a lot of time digging through the volumes of data. Reporting is absolutely the biggest shortcoming."
"When you deploy, not only is the user asked to reboot their computer, they are also asked to wait for 20 minutes while it sits there and initializes. It definitely impacts the end-user. It takes time away from their day."
"Room for improvement would be keeping up with the rate of change, specifically on Windows platforms. There are a lot of updates that come out for Microsoft Windows operating systems and the Bromium product needs to be able to keep up quickly with those updates and all the browser updates that are coming out. It's hard to do, but that's really where they need to be more responsive because we end up with problems and then we have to call support to get patches, etc."
"Initially, when we came in contact with Bromium a few years ago, it had a nice threat analyst, or a LAVA Pop, which is what they used to call it. Once it detected malware, it would show us the malware's path... I don't see that on the computers now. We only get to see that in the console. I would like to still see that on the individual machines because when we go out to look at a machine, we don't necessarily have access to the console."
More Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is ranked 28th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 23 reviews while HP Wolf Security is ranked 47th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 8 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is rated 8.2, while HP Wolf Security is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security writes "Gives a good snapshot of what's going on". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HP Wolf Security writes "Adds a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments". Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is most compared with ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Seqrite Endpoint Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Trend Vision One Endpoint Security and SonicWall Capture Client, whereas HP Wolf Security is most compared with Norton Small Business, Bitdefender Total Security, Microsoft Defender for Business, Kaspersky Total Security and ESET Inspect. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. HP Wolf Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.