We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Deep Instinct Prevention Platform 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.
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"This is stable and scalable."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"The simplicity of use is its most valuable feature. You can very clearly see things."
"I'm only using the AMP (advanced malware protection) which is protecting my file system from all the malicious things that might happen. It should protect all kinds of things that might happen on the servers, things that I cannot see."
"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."
"It is a very stable program."
"appreciate the File Trajectory feature, as it's excellent for an analyst or mobile analyst. I can track everything that happens on our server from my PC or device. Integration with SecureX is a welcome feature because it connects Cisco's integrated security portfolio with our complete infrastructure. Sandboxing is helpful, and integration with the Cisco environment is excellent as we use many of their products, and that's very valuable for us."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
"When we were looking at Carbon Black and Sophos, the prevention pieces weren't as strong when compared to DI, which is why we decided to go with DI... I would rather have a product that does the prevention up front and saves me the effort of having to wipe someone's workstation."
"It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"The detection rate is very high. In all the testing with around 20 partners in different environments, quite a lot of them had installed with other anti-malware applications, like Sophos. This software can co-exist with those applications in the same machine. This is impressive."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"Deep Instinct's detection rate is close to 100 percent."
"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."
"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."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"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."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"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."
"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."
"Due to the complexity of the technology that is used and its advanced threat detection capabilities, it is possible to encounter many delays in operation."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"When things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background... we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was."
"It would be nice if there were options where, if I have to do SIEM integration, I could do so from the UI: Just pick and choose what SIEM solutions the customers use and have options to have out-of-the-box connection facility."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
More Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 45 reviews while Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is ranked 24th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 18 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is rated 8.6. 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 Deep Instinct Prevention Platform writes "Bolsters prevention with great detection and response capabilities". 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 Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CylancePROTECT and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.
