We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for its threat-hunting capabilities, sandboxing, and swift response to attacks. Users also praised the solution's seamless integration with Talos for continuous protection. Carbon Black Endpoint is appreciated for its transparency, robust security measures, continuous monitoring, and utilization of cloud technology. Cisco Secure Endpoint could benefit from providing more scenario-based information and a simpler, more customizable main dashboard. Integration with artificial intelligence and IoT is another area for improvement. Carbon Black could enhance its reporting capabilities, endpoint query tools, and compatibility with other systems. Users also suggest improvements in the solution’s forensic tools.
Service and Support: Users said Cisco support is efficient and responsive, and customers also found it easy to find answers in the documentation without help. Some users recommend enhancing training programs and streamlining management consoles to further enhance the level of support provided. Carbon Black Endpoint customer service earned mixed reviews, with some users reporting delayed responses or unsatisfactory issue resolution.
Ease of Deployment: Users generally found Cisco Secure Endpoint easy to set up, but some users reported challenges related to agent behavior and configuration. The initial installation involves downloading an agent and installing it on endpoints, and the total deployment time ranged from a week to several months. Users say the deployment process for VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is relatively straightforward. The initial setup can be completed in a few minutes or hours, but the total deployment may take anywhere from a few days to several months.
Pricing: Cisco Secure Endpoint's pricing is seen as fair and reasonable. Some users requested additional discounts, particularly for educational purposes. Carbon Black Endpoint charges a fixed licensing fee per node. Some users noted that there are cheaper alternatives.
ROI: Cisco Secure Endpoint offers cost savings and the potential to earn money by extending services. While some said the ROI of VMware Carbon Black Endpoint was hard to quantify, other users reported successful defenses against malware attacks.
Comparison Results: Our users favor Cisco Secure Endpoint over VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. Cisco Secure Endpoint offers more comprehensive protection, better customer service, and support, making it the preferred choice. Cisco Secure Endpoint has some advanced features for finding and resolving threats that Carbon Black Endpoint lacks. Users also appreciate Cisco Secure Endpoint's pricing, whereas some users say Carbon Black Endpoint has room to improve on price.
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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"
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"The integration with other Cisco products seemed to be really effective. We had Umbrella in place and we were using AnyConnect as well as Firepower. Once a threat was detected, being able to do the threat lookups and the live tracking was really useful."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its technical support."
"The simplicity of use is its most valuable feature. You can very clearly see things."
"Device Trajectory is one of the most valuable features. We're able to dig in and really understand how things came to be and where to focus our efforts."
"It is a very stable program."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"The solution has a library where we can have multiple threat intels onboarded. We just have to subscribe to a particular site intel and they'll provide us with all of the truncated details so that we can create IOCs and alerts on the basis of those IOCs."
"I like the historical features, interface, and integration."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The whole purpose of the product, like application control, is very good, and also if you need to update some policies, it works well and instantly."
"The most valuable feature is that it detects and stops malicious executables."
"Provides visibility into the chain of attack and threats that use valid operating system processes to execute attacks."
"We have another piece of that infrastructure that does what they call threat emulation. It's like sandboxing where it takes files that it doesn't know about, puts them in a VM-type environment, and it kicks them off to see if there's any malware or tendencies that might look like malware, that kind of thing."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the support it provides."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"The solution is not stable."
"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."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"We would like to have an API integration with a SIEM solution, because as far as I know, it currently hasn't yet been released."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"The reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"Its price is okay for us, but it can always be better. There's always room for improvement when it comes to pricing."
"In terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"The EDR portion could be better. I'm not a big fan, but it works."
"I'm not sure as to the logic of how we've decided to customize it. We've only really used it since February and therefore there may be more to do on that front. That's why it's hard to say if something is missing or if we just aren't utilizing it."
"The local technical support is very poor, but the support from headquarters is very nice."
"It would be a better solution if Carbon Black Cb Defense had an on-promise solution and a virus auto delete or quarantine."
"It would be nice to have additional forensic tools that you can build into the back end."
"Based on all the security roles and the release privilege, it could take time for an application to be whitelisted and approved for use."
"Report generation can be improved."
"The node management could be much better. The one thing that they cannot do very easily is change the tenant from a backend."
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 45 reviews while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is ranked 17th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 63 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Makes it possible to see a threat once and block it across all endpoints and your entire security platform". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Carbon Black Endpoint writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.