We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and OpenText EnCase eDiscovery 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."The setup is pretty simple."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"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."
"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."
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical."
"The information the dashboard provides is very clear."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"If there are multiple alerts, the app will automatically create and rate an event instead of going through each one."
"Data Recovery: Its ability to repair damaged partitions and uncover hidden partitions from within the tool, and allow further analysis."
"The most important feature we've found is the Enscripts. That is one powerful feature that I, personally, love to use."
"It indexes much faster, and is more reflexive because of the Enscripts."
"The solution is very stable."
"It speeds up the process, so I can meet my deadlines."
"I like the processing feature on the product because it does everything at once, i.e, indexing, recovery, keyword searches, etc."
"The technical support is excellent."
"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 should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"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 can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"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 are a large number of false positives."
"The price could be a little lower."
"There's an overall lack of features."
"There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly."
"Dashboards do not allow everyone to see what's happening."
"Limited remote connection."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"Every 30 or 40 days, there's a new version and we need to go and make sure our customer's laptops are upgraded."
"Ease of use and learning curve need improvement."
"I would like to see a capability to ingest and absorb more data. That would be really good. It currently is lacking this function."
"We have come across problems with the end-case. We could not find an email discovery type of module and there was not flexibility with the email."
"The reporting is a bit unreliable. It needs to be better."
"Sometimes the application can take more time to complete the image processing or fail at the end of the process."
"In the past, incident response time for tech support was slow."
"There were minor UI bugs."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is ranked 6th in eDiscovery with 8 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is rated 7.8. 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 OpenText EnCase eDiscovery writes "A stable and scalable hybrid solution with easy setup". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is most compared with Nuix eDiscovery, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and Microsoft Purview eDiscovery. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. OpenText EnCase eDiscovery report.
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.