We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection 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."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The stability is very good."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"It doesn't cause the slowness of the system, which is one of the reasons why I like it."
"There are some competitive products on the market, but the best is Microsoft Defender because it's very easy to integrate. That's one reason a lot of clients want Microsoft Defender. It's also very easy to implement compared to other solutions."
"It's great for investigating what's happening on a machine. They show a whole bunch of machine timeline events that are related to a security incident. They have quite good details on the things related to threat and vulnerability management, such as any weakness that has been disclosed publicly, assets that are exposed, and if there is an exploit active in the wild for that vulnerability. It can provide you with all such information, which is cool."
"The most valuable feature is that it comes with the package, so there is no additional installation of third-party software. It's also easy to use."
"We use Microsoft Defender for the antivirus."
"The folders and files protection are its most valuable features. These have been valuable because of the increase in ransomware attacks. With these two features, I can ensure that no changes have been made to our system or endpoint folders and files without the user being aware."
"It integrates very well with all Windows workstations or other Microsoft Endpoint products. It also works quite well. So far, I have not had any issue that hasn't been sorted out. It doesn't use too many resources, so you don't have to install different things."
"The EDR feature is most valuable."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"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."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight."
"A concern is ransomware, whether people can penetrate and encrypt my data or steal my credit card/banking information."
"They should come up with pre-built inner workflows."
"If the solution could be integrated more with Defender for Cloud, to be more unified, that would help. It is good now, but even more integration could be done with Defender for Cloud. We see two different portals. If Defender for Endpoint could be ported to the CSPM, Defender for Cloud, that would make things even easier for us."
"The application control feature requires improvement."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is secure but when it comes to security all solutions could improve security."
"I wish they would extend the use of the Security Central portal, even for the free option of Defender. Because, as companies grow, it is labor intensive to manage the AV and detection part of it. For companies already subscribed to Office 365, I think this would be a good enhancement."
"The solution could use improvement on the interface."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. 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 WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
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.