We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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 main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"Its interface and pricing are most valuable. It is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"The management capabilities, allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks."
"The stability of this product is very good."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."
"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."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"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."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"The solution is efficient."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"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."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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 amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"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."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"It's more focused on network communication. If a customer wants to increase the level of protection and start working with documents, it's impossible to integrate these features into the system. It's more of a communication-oriented system than a content security-oriented system."
"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"The solution lacks real-time, on-demand antivirus."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"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."
"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."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 44th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0. 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 Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.