We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Cisco Secure Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is commended for its extensive cross-platform protection, user-friendly interface, and compatibility with third-party software. Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for its threat-hunting capabilities, sandboxing, and swift response to attacks. Users also praised the solution's seamless integration with Talos for continuous protection. Kaspersky users requested improvements in security and stability. They also want better documentation, faster malware scanning, enhanced encryption, and improved remote management. Cisco Secure Endpoint could benefit from providing more scenario-based information and a simpler, more customizable main dashboard. Integration with artificial intelligence and IoT is another area for improvement.
Service and Support: Users say that Kaspersky’s support is helpful and responsive, whether it comes from resellers, partners, or the vendor. Users said Cisco support is efficient and responsive, and customers also found it easy to find answers in the documentation without help. Some users recommend enhancing training programs and streamlining management consoles to further enhance the level of support provided.
Ease of Deployment: Some reported that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is straightforward to set up, while others find it more complex and time-consuming. Users generally found Cisco Secure Endpoint easy to set up, but some users reported challenges related to agent behavior and configuration. The initial installation involves downloading an agent and installing it on endpoints, and the total deployment time ranged from a week to several months.
Pricing: Users gave mixed feedback on the price of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. Some found it reasonable while others thought it was expensive. Cisco Secure Endpoint's pricing is seen as fair and reasonable. Some users requested additional discounts, particularly for educational purposes.
ROI: Our reviewers said that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business has proven to be a solid investment. Cisco Secure Endpoint offers cost savings and the potential to earn money by extending services.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business over Cisco Secure Endpoint. Kaspersky provides extensive protection across various platforms and systems, offering features like web filtering, email filtering, and anomaly control. Users find it simple to deploy and use, with high detection rates and minimal impact on system resources. Cisco Secure Endpoint requires improvements in customization and integration.
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"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."
"I am told that we get over 100 million emails a month. This filters them down and allows only somewhere about three million emails, which is a great help."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"For the initial first level of support, we provide it from our side. If there's escalation required, we use Cisco tech for the AMP. And again, they are perfect. I mean, one of the best, compared to any other vendors."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"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 solution is secure."
"Deployment and centralized management are essential for us because of the number of loads that we have along with the number of geographic locations where we are based."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides total security, everything in one."
"The product's most valuable features are automation and central administration."
"The failure rate is very low."
"The reporting feature is good. Also, the device control is good."
"It performs quite well as a firewall protection provider."
"The implementation and integration are easy."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The support needs improvement."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"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."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"The reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"Integration and dashboard are areas with certain shortcomings in Cisco Secure Endpoint."
"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."
"It is not very stable because we have new versions four times a year, which fixes bugs. We had some problems with some deployments."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"The product must improve its price to suit small and mid-size enterprises."
"I would like to see machine learning and AI as added features."
"Maybe the solution's monitoring could be improved with more dashboards, so there's no back and forth, back and forth."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business doesn't have a built-in DLP (data loss prevention) solution."
"This product could be improved by integration with Linux. The one limitation this product has is that it's not compatible with and doesn't offer protection for Linux servers. It could also be easier to configure."
"I would like for Kaspersky to generate reports when it detects issues such as malware."
"It slows down the system sometimes, and it has the occasional false positive where it deems something a virus when it isn't."
"I'd like to see them improve encryption and remote management in the future. Kaspersky could also improve its scanning technology. Other solutions have adopted machine learning and deep learning, but Kaspersky still uses signature-based scanning."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 9th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 45 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0. 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Trend Vision One Endpoint Security. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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.