We performed a comparison between Code42 Incydr and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"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."
"The stability is very good."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Backup and recovery have been great, but I love having the ability to keep the hybrid type build which they offer."
"t has a very user friendly status bar with common errors and has logs built in to the console so we can review the issues or status of CrashPlan."
"Code42 Next-Gen DLP is scalable."
"Low system overhead, setting retention policies, ease of use"
"Risk factors can be adjusted for all intricate details."
"The solution is very stable. Very rarely do we have any issues with it. We don't have to deal with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it to be reliable."
"It had the ability to preseed by sending in a data drive and could restore by sending the user a data drive."
"Security tools: Being able to monitor data going in and coming off our endpoints. Seeing what it is and where it's going is awesome."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution is not stable."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"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."
"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."
"You can't always filter out data that you'd like to."
"I would like to see more flexibility on privileges, perhaps create another kind of admin for regions. Also, I would like the ability to access logs without having to be on the actual device or a super-admin."
"In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue."
"Java, please get rid of Java."
"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"Due to recent changes that effectively abandoned an entire segment of their user base, I no longer trust nor can recommend Code42 products."
"What I think could be improved is how I get support."
"Reporting could use an overhaul. It is very limited."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Code42 Incydr is ranked 42nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 78 reviews while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 36th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 19 reviews. Code42 Incydr is rated 9.0, while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Code42 Incydr writes "Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". Code42 Incydr is most compared with Threat Detection, Investigation & Response (TDIR) Platform, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Morphisec, Qualys Multi-Vector EDR and Backup and Restore for SharePoint & Microsoft Office 365, whereas Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Code42 Incydr vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.