We performed a comparison between Bitdefender Sandbox Analyzer and Microsoft Defender for Office 365 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet and others in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)."It is easy to use, and there is a lot of automation. So, users don't need to worry about that."
"Sandbox Analyzer is easy to use. It's simple to drill down into the data. In a lot of the competing products, an extremely informed end-user can do battle with the tools provided, but in today's market, end-users have less and less time to try and keep up. The CSAW alerts come out every day, and they're huge. Adobe did a master patch last Thursday and another one a few days later."
"The solution is useful in the event of a gray file or grayware, as there are certain files users may download of which we know little about."
"I like the fact that it works pretty well. It can be a little aggressive at times, but I'd rather have it be a little bit aggressive than not catch what it's supposed to catch. We've been running that platform for about five years, and we've not really had any viruses or malware get through. It's also easy to set up, and it's easy to manage."
"At the moment we are satisfied with this product. It's a stable, scalable, and resilient solution for us."
"The solution is very easy to use. All you have to do is to assign the license to the end-user and it's done. The customer will only have the feature activated, and the solution will monitor the emails to determine if they are a threat or not."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 has improved my organization's security. It makes it easier to manage the infrastructure without the help of third-party applications."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is a stable solution."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365's most valuable feature is its performance."
"The product is not resource-intensive."
"It should be more secure. There should be more protection, especially for non-signature-based malware. It works fine for non-signature-based malware, but I expect it to become a bit more advanced to be able to cope with future or upcoming environments."
"We propose the on-premises solution to most of our customers, for which we must provide a license, although no such request accompanies customers who want a cloud-based solution."
"It does everything we need. We haven't been able to throw anything at it that it couldn't handle."
"It would be better if there were real-time alerts. The whole suite, unlike most anti-virus consoles that just ping you when there's an infection or something, for some inexplicable reason, Bitdefender doesn't do that. The most you could do is get an hourly email, or maybe if there's an outbreak that affects 30% of our machines, it sends me an email. There's no real-time alert to say, "Hey, so-and-so literally 30 seconds ago just had this happen on their machine." Real-time reporting would be a huge improvement. All in all, it's a pretty nice product, generally speaking. They do a pretty good job. They can pretty much go toe to toe with just about anybody. But it's that kind of real-time nature. I've not had occasion to use the EDR portion to actually try and do any kind of custom scripting to drill into things that are going on at the endpoints. But my understanding from reading comments of others is that it's not particularly flexible in that regard to be able to do things like that."
"We would like to see the time it takes for the sandbox to analyze a file reduced from its ten or fifteen minute duration to five."
"One area for improvement is support, in terms of being able to reach them and, especially, technical support for configuration."
"There is room for improvement in terms of reporting."
"It would be better if it were more scalable. It depends on the architecture, but we would like to make it more scalable for both data centers."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 could improve by giving customers information on techniques to prevent threats. For example, information about best practices on how to protect their own devices against hackers and scammers, such as educational information or training. This would help others have a better understanding of cyber security. Additionally, there can be more security features added."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"The custom alerts have to improve a lot."
"The GUI is sometimes slow to fetch the device report and could be improved."
"They have moved features from one console to another. Things have been moved around in the interface and it takes me time to find where certain features are."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender Sandbox Analyzer is ranked 18th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 4 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is ranked 1st in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 41 reviews. Bitdefender Sandbox Analyzer is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Bitdefender Sandbox Analyzer writes "You can create time-sensitive policies, apply them, and push reconfiguration, so that engine is functioning, tuned, and safe". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Office 365 writes "Allows for easy reporting of problems, valuable anti-phishing, and anti-malware support". Bitdefender Sandbox Analyzer is most compared with , whereas Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is most compared with Proofpoint Email Protection, Mimecast Email Security, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Cisco Secure Email and Barracuda Email Security Gateway.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.
