We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager 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."I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The stability is very good."
"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"
"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."
"Secure Endpoint has decreased our time to remediate by providing the tools and the integrations we need so we can quickly look across our entire network, look for those threats, and actually make good decisions."
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."
"Cisco has definitely improved our organization a lot. In terms of business, our company feels safer. We actually switched from legacy signature-based solutions to threat intelligence-based and machine learning-based solutions, which is Cisco Secure. This has improved our security significantly, from 10% of signature-based technology security to 99.9% of the current one which we are running. We were happy."
"It used to take us a month to find out that something is infected, we now know that same day, as soon it is infected."
"The most valuable feature of Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager, which my company mainly uses, is patching. Another valuable feature of Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager is that it allows you to view the inventory list of the different machines."
"It provides security features for unified endpoint management."
"The best part about Ivanti and Matrix 42 is that they are low-code solution builders with drag-and-drop capabilities regarding service management."
"Patching and remediation are the strongest features."
"The key differentiator is that it manages mobile devices and laptops in the same console. Windows and Linux are on the same console. This is the only product that does this. It's really the best in the industry."
"The most valuable features of the solution are accessing the data through the mobiles and meeting with the compliance for security best practices."
"The solution's most valuable features are its patch management functionality and provisioning."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Detections could be improved."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The solution is not stable."
"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."
"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."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"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 terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"It's pretty good as it is, but its cost could be improved."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"The technical support is very slow."
"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."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"An area for improvement in Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager is reporting. It's lacking. For example, Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager reports should tell you if the agent is up to date, if the security patch is updated, etc."
"The product's blocking definition needs improvement."
"Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager's support provided to its users by the vendor is one area that needs to improve."
"The solution needs a complete overhaul or makeover. It gets stuck sometimes because they're focusing on the cloud UEM stuff rather than paying as much attention to that particular piece. The ease of use could be improved. It combines many different functionalities that you would need multiple servers like SCCM. If I wanted to train people, I’d move to a higher level from an Apache architect. There are five or six different products. So, training functional staff to use the product can be challenging because it can sometimes be cumbersome. Reporting is challenging. We use Avanti extraction to report off an endpoint. We don't use the reporting because of the need for more functionality, granularity, or customization."
"When you open a new mobile, you automatically come onboard the mobile on the Ivanti platform but it needs some improvements."
"If I want to integrate the solution with any other solution, pushing the policies from the Ivanti side is a bit tough."
"One of the features that Ivanti could improve is patching for non-Windows settings, such as Linux and Ubuntu."
More Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 45 reviews while Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager is ranked 46th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager 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 Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager writes "A security solution to manage devices with patching and remediation feature". 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 Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager is most compared with BigFix, Tanium, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager and Check Point Harmony Endpoint. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager 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.