We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and NetWitness Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)."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."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"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."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"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."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"Cybereason absolutely enables us to mitigate and isolate on the fly. Our managed detection response telemetry has dropped dramatically since we began using it. It's very top-of-mind. We were running some tabletop exercises and none of the detections were getting triggered by the managed security services provider. So we needed to find a solution that would trigger high-fidelity alerts. That was Cybereason and it dramatically changed our landscape from the detection and response perspective."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"I can have enterprise security, email security, next generation firewall security log, HIDS and NIDS logs, etc. all on the same dashboard. It makes it easy to pinpoint or correlate our server to this. I can find out if there is lateral movement. This is the biggest advantage of this solution."
"The most valuable feature is that we can create our own connectors for any application, and NetWitness provides the training and tools to do it."
"Performance and reporting are very good."
"Incident management is its most valuable feature."
"It gives the ability to investigate into network traffic in the Net and the organization what we couldn't do before."
"The most valuable features are the packet decoder, log decoder, and concentrator."
"It's quite economical compared to other solutions in the market."
"NetWitness can be highly beneficial for incident detection and response."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The solution is not stable."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"Log aggregation is an issue with this solution because there are a huge number of alerts in a single instance."
"The multi-tenant capabilities are lagging compared to IBM QRadar."
"The system architecture is complex and sometimes it’s hard to troubleshoot potential problems."
"The user interface is a little bit difficult for new users and it needs to be improved."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Sometimes, it gives me static when integrating Windows-based systems. It should produce a precise log of sorts as to where the problem is. For example, a few days ago because of the McAfee application firewall, I couldn't get access to the particular Windows machine. So, my team and I had to figure out by ourselves that there was a virus responsible for the obstacle. This solution should trigger a meaningful log or message indicating the reason the user or implementer can't get into the machine."
"The solution should have more integration capabilities with different platforms."
"The initial setup was complex because it takes a lot of time to complete the implementation."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 36th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 19 reviews while NetWitness Platform is ranked 19th in Log Management with 36 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Darktrace, whereas NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Microsoft Sentinel.
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.
