We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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."Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"It is stable and scalable."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us."
"One thing that I like about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it is detecting all the suspicious or malicious binaries, and it has integration with Palo Alto Firewall."
"They did what they said. This solution could apply to any scenario."
"The product has an intuitive dashboard."
"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."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"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."
"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."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications."
"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else."
"It's not an ideal choice for smaller businesses, as you need a minimum of 200 endpoints to even use the solution at all."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"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."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"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."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 44th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". 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". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and CylancePROTECT. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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.