We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR 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."
"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."
"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"
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"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 interface is user-friendly."
"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 solution is efficient."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"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."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The solution is easy to deploy."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are its overall track record and features that fit our use case."
"The solution is very reliable."
"It is a scalable solution. I would rate scalability a ten out of ten."
"It is a scalable solution."
"I have found the solution very useful, it integrates well with other platforms."
"I chose Cortex XSOAR because the client also has Palo Alto firewalls. I can incorporate the data from the Palo Alto firewalls into Cortex and send it into the same data lake to manipulate that data. It lets me manage and monitor the data in one place."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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."
"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."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and 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."
"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 network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"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."
"I would love to see more flexibility on what we can display and design on the dashboards."
"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing model."
"The dashboard performance could be improved."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"It is been decommissioned by Palo Alto."
"With Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, managing its setup phase can be a complicated task."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the Panorama feature. We had to turn it off because it was not working properly."
"The solution is very expensive."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 36th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 19 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 42 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4. 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 Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Enables the investigators to go through the review process a lot quicker". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Microsoft Sentinel, Fortinet FortiSOAR and Swimlane.
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.
