We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Perimeter 81 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Anti-Malware Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Provides good vulnerability assessment."
"It has Kusto Query Language (KQL), so we can use our own queries to find anything."
"It is quite stable. We have not had any cases, i.e., viruses, that would require a reboot, etc. We have never had a situation where we needed to reinstall the tools as a result of the Defender application or a feature being corrupt."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is beneficial because we are using Microsoft Windows and all the core solutions are made by Microsoft, such as the authentic platform, operating system, and antivirus protection. It is a heterogeneous environment. We had to use third-party solutions before and update everything separately. For example, the policy for antivirus. With Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, when Microsoft Windows receives updates it will update with it. This is one main advantage of this solution."
"It is a very advanced system based on AI. It has a very large database of places or sites on the internet where you should not go. It is continuously online."
"The protection that it provides is quite good."
"We have liked the fact that it comes with Microsoft Windows 10 and it is constantly updated with all new virus definitions. It is also updated with new security features on a regular basis."
"It's very easy to scale because it comes built-in with Windows 10, and you just need to enable it. This can be done on scale using group policies or through Endpoint Manager on cloud or Intune."
"Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"It has provided a seamless gateway to much-needed platforms."
"The feature that I have found to be most valuable is the reputation that the company has regarding privacy. Nowadays, this is critical, especially when you do all of your work online."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"It keeps us all accountable and ensures secure internet connections while we all work remotely."
"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"It can be more secure."
"The anti-ransomware features need to be improved upon."
"I would just like them to have more consistency, and that's a comment that's across the board with Microsoft. They change things a lot."
"Microsoft Defender could be improved with features more like the McAfee ePO. It would be better if I had a console to get all the information for my endpoints. Maybe this is too much for it, but it would be better if it could handle those non-signature-based malicious codes or viruses."
"Sometimes the software doesn't work the way we expect it to, and in those cases, we can't communicate with a device because it may be infected."
"The solution needs to improve its ransomware. It's not so good. It could also use some general performance optimization for the computers the solution operates on, to ensure it does not slow down the devices."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should include better automation that will make it faster to detect the latest threats happening across the world."
"The solution can be more user-friendly."
"In order to have to bypass the login using the website, a good feature for Perimeter 81 to have is a login instance in the Perimeter 81 application. I'm using a Mac and we don't have that functionality."
"Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"There are a few areas where the solution could be improved. For instance, we sometimes encounter connectivity issues, which can be problematic. Recently, I experienced a connectivity issue while trying to move to Azure. Connectivity issues can be quite frustrating."
"Currently, I am not able to define a different country or location, which can result in negative experiences as the tool is being recognized by websites and this can make it difficult to access them or force me to disable the program temporarily."
"The platform still lacks relevant dashboards and the ability to customize them based on our needs."
"The solution's speed of upload and download is an area where it lacks"
"One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Anti-Malware Tools with 182 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 9th in Anti-Malware Tools with 22 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Perimeter 81 writes "Great SAML and SCIM support with the ability to deploy site-2-site tunnels with specific IP restrictions". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Tailscale. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Perimeter 81 report.
See our list of best Anti-Malware Tools vendors.
We monitor all Anti-Malware Tools 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.
