We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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 firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The solution protects us."
"Since it's cloud-managed, the solution is easy to administer, especially if the person using it is in a different geophysical location."
"It provides a feature for scanning and analyzing endpoints, which is a value-add for our infrastructure. With the advancements in the Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs), Sophos Intercept X analyzes an APT and the behavior of the endpoints. It then gives us a detailed dashboard with more information about the endpoints and their security and risk level. While deploying Sophos Intercept X, we identified a lot of vulnerability and risky endpoints that our previous solution didn't cover, which proved that this solution is the best."
"The client isolation feature is a very effective feature."
"It does its job — it protects us from viruses. We don't really interact with it very much."
"All of the features are very important for anyone who is supporting a large number of computers."
"Sophos Intercept X is easy to install and has a lower price than similar solutions."
"Intercept X's smart prevention it's very good as so are its machine learning capabilities for troubleshooting channels and files."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The user-friendliness of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is particularly impressive. Even with basic technical knowledge, users can easily navigate the system, make changes, and implement updates."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"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."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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 only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"This product does not handle USB drives well."
"The Data Loss Prevention module can be better. It should also have threat hunting capabilities."
"We are not able to merge the sub-estates. If we create multiple sub-states and there may be instances where a user is in a different sub-state, it may not be possible for us to relocate that user from one sub-state to another through the console. We have to merge them manually which is not ideal."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"Sophos Intercept X doesn't have its own firewall that utilizes the Windows Firewall or intrusion prevention."
"It would be better if it can automatically generate a report for each and every user so that the users get to know the things that shouldn't be accessed from their PCs. It can have information about malicious and non-malicious sites so users are aware of them, and they don't access malicious websites. Such reports can be generated at the end of the day. We should also be able to get through to their support team quickly. Currently, it takes more than half an hour to get through to a technical person."
"It would be beneficial if you could expand support for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 without charging an additional fee."
"The problem is that if you have a lot of different components going on, each managed under a different umbrella, then you're going to be spending a lot of time hopping back and forth between the different components to see, "Well, I got hit here. What did my firewall see? I got hit in the firewall, the firewall says it allowed that attack in, did it land on anything to compromise any of my endpoints?""
"There are a few areas for improvement. We have encountered licensing issues on occasion, and sometimes updates don't apply properly."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"It would be much more convenient if the migration tool could be installed directly on the customer's VMs, enabling a smoother migration process to the new infrastructure, with potential restrictions addressed accordingly."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is ranked 30th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor Endpoint Secure writes "Provides a unified and multi-layer security solution". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Seqrite Endpoint Security, whereas Sangfor Endpoint Secure is most compared with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Open EDR and Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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.