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 EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response)."The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"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."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"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."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to write rules and triggers for network communication, and then being able to investigate based on that."
"It gives the ability to investigate into network traffic in the Net and the organization what we couldn't do before."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation. It can report in real-time and monitor the management."
"In my opinion, the solution's most valuable feature is its capacity to monitor network traffic, logs from devices within the network, and network captures. This capability extends beyond logs to include full network capturing."
"Offers a good wireless feature."
"The product's initial setup phase was not at all difficult."
"It's quite economical compared to other solutions in the market."
"The development of use cases on the SSA console is quite user friendly. This means that the security analyst or the researcher does not have to learn another language."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The support needs improvement."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"Log aggregation is an issue with this solution because there are a huge number of alerts in a single instance."
"Health monitoring of the event sources and devices."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The tool's integration capability isn't so great."
"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 system architecture is complex and sometimes it’s hard to troubleshoot potential problems."
"The threat detection capability and centralizing and upgrading capability need to be improved. The threat alert capability needs to be improved as well because there is some lag time at present. They need to work on their database search too."
"Technical support could be improved."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 38th in EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) with 19 reviews while NetWitness Platform is ranked 30th in Log Management with 35 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, Darktrace and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel and Cisco Secure Network Analytics.
We monitor all EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) 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.