We performed a comparison between Cynet and Microsoft 365 Defender based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Cynet offers strong ransomware protection and an intuitive interface. Microsoft 365 Defender offers effortless integration with other Microsoft solutions. Users praised its flexibility and comprehensive protection against multiple threat types. Cynet needs to expand device support and add customization options. Users suggest improving network monitoring and strengthening integration with other tools. Microsoft 365 Defender could upgrade its machine learning and AI capabilities. Some users suggested adopting Zero Trust features.
Service and Support: Cynet's customer service is consistently lauded for its excellence. They have a dedicated support team that is available round the clock, and they also have a contingency plan for urgent incidents. Some of our reviewers were satisfied with Microsoft support, but others complained about slow responses and lackluster problem-solving capabilities.
Ease of Deployment: Cynet’s setup is highly efficient, with the ability to configure thousands of devices quickly. Setting up Microsoft 365 Defender is potentially complex and may involve integrating with existing policies. Some users reported longer deployment times.
Pricing: Customers generally view Cynet's pricing and licensing experience as affordable and a good value for its features. Some users say that Microsoft 365 Defender is good value, while others perceive it as more expensive than similar competing products.
ROI: Cynet yields an excellent ROI by preventing cyberattacks and safeguarding sensitive data. Microsoft 365 Defender offers savings, attack prevention, consolidation of security measures, and proactive threat detection.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Cynet over Microsoft 365 Defender. The solution distinguishes itself with its ease of use, comprehensive protection, and outstanding customer service. Cynet offers a customizable experience, automatic updates, and a user-friendly dashboard, while Microsoft 365 Defender receives mixed reviews for its complex setup and pricing.
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"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"
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that the configuration and the usage of the product are not so complicated. For people responsible for using this infrastructure for the first line of workstation monitoring, it's quite easy to use."
"The dashboard is beautiful, overall easy of use, and the UBA and NBA features are valued."
"We are very satisfied with the level of performance we get."
"A good feature is how the solution packages varied information into a single dashboard that's readable and meets our needs."
"If some unusual activity happens on the network, such as I open administrator sessions in a short duration of an hour on many computers in the lab, it sends me an alert about my network saying that one user opened three, four, or five sessions in one hour. Similarly, if I try to play with the disk size on a computer, it will send me an alert, and it will also stop the operation."
"It's transparent, so it's not something where every user has to press a button to download or do the thing. It is centralized, in fact. Personally, I use Malwarebytes and other tools, which are fine for home use. Cynet is also relatively silent in terms of operation, except when it's required to act."
"The product is very easy to use. Customers really appreciate that."
"The level of automation is very good because the majority of the time, it blocks the attacks without requiring anything from our side. The technicians don't have to do anything. They are just alerted about what happened. So, the user intelligence works quite well."
"Defender XDR has a feature called the timeline that lets you track all activities. It helps a lot with investigations."
"The ability to hunt that IM data set or the identity data set at the same time is valuable. As incident response professionals, we are very used to EDRs and having device process registry telemetry, but a lot of times, we do not have that identity data right there with us, so we have to go search for it in some other silo. Being able to cross-correlate via both datasets at the same time is something that we can only do in Def"
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"I like Defender XDR's automation capabilities. XDR isn't automated by default, but you can automate it to respond. If an attack is performed anywhere within the organization, you can isolate that instance from the network. This is what I can figure out for it. When integrated with Sentinel, you can set up playbooks to automate all the alerts gathered on Sentinel from different Microsoft solutions. Sentinel has a wider range of capabilities than XDR."
"Microsoft Defender XDR is scalable."
"Microsoft XDR's system of analysis and investigation is super convenient for our customers. It integrates with other Microsoft solutions like Defender for 365 to protect email traffic from malicious external web links and phishing."
"Setting up Microsoft 365 Defender is easy. It's a user-friendly solution that provides threat protection. It has good stability and scalability."
"Having a single pane of glass for all Microsoft security services makes everything much easier. A security analyst can go to a single portal and see everything in one view. The integration of everything into one portal is a huge benefit."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The support needs improvement."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"In future releases, I would like to see cloud security aspects included."
"They have automated response capability, and they're moving more and more into SOAR capability. They have built-in deception technology with host-file users, phantoms, etc. We used to call them honeypots. So, they're on target. They're doing a really good job, and they should continue to improve with SOAR."
"Compliance reports need to improve."
"Management of the console could be simplified and made more user-friendly because right now it's not very easy to use."
"The command line interface could be improved."
"I would like to see support for mobile protection and some additional reports included."
"I would like to see more emphasis on building the data lake and storing all endpoint data in the enterprise data lake so that data mining can be performed"
"The reporting is a little weak and could be improved. The other downside is that Cynet does not use the local time zone. It's based off of Greenwich Mean Time."
"The cost can be high if you want to build custom license packages. Another area for improvement is the policies. In Azure, we need to implement policies in JSON format, but in 365 Defender 365, it would be helpful to use a different format so we can customize the platform."
"The management features could be improved, particularly in terms of better integration with Intune, Microsoft's cloud-based management solution."
"Defender also lacks automated detection and response. You need to resolve issues manually. You can manage multiple Microsoft security products from a single portal, and all your security recommendations are in one place. It's easy to understand and manage. However, I wouldn't say Defender is a single pane of glass. You still need to switch between all of the available Microsoft tools. You can see all the alerts in one panel, but you can't automate remediation."
"From an integration standpoint, it is always improving overall. With Security Copilot coming out, as partners, we are waiting for the GDAP support so that we can actually see Security Copilot on behalf of customers if they subscribe to it."
"The solution does not offer a unified response and standard data."
"The user interface of Microsoft 365 Defender could improve. They could make it simpler."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"The dashboard should be easier to use. There is also improvement needed in the reporting when it comes to exporting or scheduling reports."
Cynet is ranked 9th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 35 reviews while Microsoft Defender XDR is ranked 5th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 80 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Defender XDR is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender XDR writes "Includes four services and four products, which can help organizations a lot". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Defender XDR is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager, Wazuh and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Cynet vs. Microsoft Defender XDR report.
See our list of best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors, best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.