Symantec Endpoint Security Reviews

We work with Symantec DLP and Endpoint Protection as our main security solutions. We have deployed Endpoint Protection for a few customers and for our own organization as a test: Endpoint Protection, Email Security, and DLP.

We are a partner but we are a user as well. Our company has more than 100 employees and our group, which is made up of different companies, has more than 400 employees, and we are planning to deploy it for our group. Our company is the system integrator, while other companies within the group are service providers or different types of service integrators for areas like fintech.

It has improved our productivity and, from a security point of view, we feel safe from spam. For endpoint protection, we are not facing problems now.

I cannot say the stability is excellent, but it is very good.

Scalability, of course, is good. They acquire different companies sometimes and they adapt their different technologies.

We get good support from Symantec. We find that during integration, if we face any problems, we get a good response from the OEM and we solve them very quickly. Technical support is very good, they have a toll-free number.

We didn't have anything at this scale. We just used Kaspersky as an antivirus, but we are not using it now, we are using Symantec Endpoint Protection which covers everything. Symantec is better, it covers more requirements. Antivirus solutions only cover some basics, but Endpoint Protection is the next generation. It covers antivirus, spamware, ransomware; all this is covered through Endpoint Protection.

We selected Symantec because it is at the top of industry reviews. We also know that globally, Symantec spends a lot of money for R&D and we believe it will remain up to the mark.

We also use Symantec Email Security which improves our productivity and protects our valuable data. Email Isolation is the only feature which the others don't have. When we use it we find that we are free from phishing mail, etc.

The setup was straightforward. It takes very little time. It's not that complex.

I have not actually done an ROI calculation, but from what I understand, considering the cost and complexity and the technical support and deployment, if I consider all these things, the return on investment is good.

Pricing and licensing for our country is very good. It's not that expensive and the endpoint security is very good. It's not as cheap as some others, but they are not as good.

 We are evaluating Imperva, as we have some customer requests to do a PoC on that, as well as other product like F5 and A10. We have the PoC boxes for A10 for load-balancing and DDoS. We also have some NGFWs, like Check Point - we are doing a PoC and testing it as a firewall and as endpoint protection. CyberArk is another among the products we are focusing on for our customers.

Our market is very aware of Symantec, A10, and F5. F5 is predominant and, obviously, there is Cisco as well, which is a dominant company from a firewall point of view. We don't push all of their security products, like FirePower etc., because we understand that they are not a leader for firewalls. Palo Alto, Check Point, and Fortinet have been leaders in the last few years. 

But we are focusing on Check Point and Palo Alto. They are slowly growing and customers are buying their NGFWs and their endpoint protection or some other security product they have, for double-protection.

Since we have done two very successful PoCs, one live PoC for my largest customer, which is in government, and another for a private company, I recommend that other customers take the Symantec solution as their main security: I prefer Endpoint, Email Security, and DLP. Symantec has other solutions which I don't prefer. They have network analyzers and WAF but I prefer the Imperva WAF, which is better.

In our company, most of the 100 people are using this solution and their roles range from management to normal end-user. We have three staff, maximum, for maintenance, and their roles are IT administrator, and system managers. We do plan to increase our usage.

I would rate this product at eight out of ten, based on the technical support, cost, and their local presence as well.

• Primary endpoint protection for our office. 

It was replaced with my MSP's contracted solution, but that's being replaced by our own solution.

It protected well enough, but we ran Malwarebytes in conjunction to help protect against zero-day exploits/malware issues that occasionally slipped through.

We were disappointed that we were stuck with its local admin server for so long when other solutions had cloud management.

• An easier management portal
• Setting up and managing profiles was overly complex
• An easier cloud management portal would be appreciated.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is easy to use.

I am completely satisfied with this solution.

Overall, the price could be reduced.

We have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for at least five years.

We are using the latest versions.

We have no issues with the stability of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security.

It's a scalable solution.

We have approximately 500 users in our organization.

The technical support provided by Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is good.

I use Google Meet.

We use whatever the customer wants because we are IT, service providers. However, we use Amazon for our internal application.

We also use Linux, most of the time.

The installation is straightforward.

It could be cheaper.

I would recommend this solution to others who are considering using it.

I would rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security an eight out of ten.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is used for network security.

The solution is easy to use.

I have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for approximately 10 years.

I have found Symantec End-User Endpoint Security to be stable.

The time frame for the implementation all depends on the number of users, the number of licenses that have been purchased by the company. The typical time frame is three to four days.

I have approximately five customers using this solution.

The technical support could improve because when you reach level one support there is a lot of delays.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is easy to deploy.

To do the implementation it is best to have one engineer and one IT person for the job.

We have some customers on a one-year license and others on a three-year license.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security a ten out of ten.

It's good at detecting signature-based stuff and stopping that, but what Symantec misses, CrowdStrike would pick up. I'm hoping to move CrowdStrike 100% to get rid of Symantec.

It needs to die. In my opinion, Symantec was a really great security company, 10, 15 years ago. They went out, they bought all the great tools and then they never did anything with them. So they've just fallen behind and there's nothing that's going to work now to bring them back up the date that's going to regain user confidence.

In order to improve, I would like to see active remediation tools, where I can connect to systems and do things directly on the system without having to leave the tool.

I have been using this solution for five years. 

I would rate it a two out of ten because I think it is outdated, ancient, lacking the features that the current solutions have. And unfortunately, I think it's being passed around so much that Symantec's now Broadcom, that nobody's given it any of the attention or the love that it needs to keep it a viable solution. Ultimately, I think it's going to die.

We use this solution for its  antivirus capabilities   . It is an on-premises deployment.

Centralized & localized control of client machines ,  using the SEPM dashboard.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the antivirus and the protection against Ransomware/Malware/Zero day attacks and device control

I would really like some of the features that are available in Kaspersky Enterprise to be available in the client version of this solution.

In the next release of this solution, I would like to see more to do with malware, encryption technology, and controlling mobile devices. I would like to be able to protect my wireless equipment at that level.

I have been using this solution for 12 years.

I've had no issues with stability in the ten years that I have been using it.

This product is being pushed the maximum, and we are using it every day.

It is stable, and once you put in the policies, it does what it is supposed to do.

From my experience, I find scaling this solution is difficult. You have to work your way around it. It takes some time getting used to the admin dashboard before you can make any changes.

We have about sixty users in the company. Two of them are administrators and the remaining are end-users.

Technical support for this solution is ok. I have no issues with them.

We did not use another solution prior to using Symantec.

From my point of view, the initial setup of this solution was pretty easy.

Only one person is required for the maintenance and to handle support assistance. Everything is done remotely. You just push the changes across the network.

I performed the deployment myself, and it takes about an hour, or perhaps two hours at most.

Considering the features, the price of this solution is average. We pay our licensing fees on a yearly basis, and everything is included in that price. Whether it is via email or phone call, they do what needs to be done.

Evaluating fortigate client antivirus and security features 

My recommendation is that people should try this product.

In using this solution, I have learned a lot about our security and what needs to be done.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I find QRadar and the Active Threat Defense the most valuable. The ATP, Active Theft Protection, is very good. They've got very solid detection rates from P2. Those and some of the other programs are very valuable.

The Centralized Management could be improved. The deployment is very limited. They can improve on reporting as well. If they can improve threat incident analysis, that would be great.

The solution itself is pretty comprehensive at this stage, and the features that we would like to be added to these are available as separate purchases, so I wouldn't that there's anything new that I need in there, they probably covered all the bases at this stage.

The solution is one hundred percent stable.

The solution is completely scalable.

Technical support is okay. I'm not completely satisfied with them.

The initial setup is pretty simple. I believe that the tools that are available to do the deployment are not up to standard as compared to some of the other products, and we deal with all the other products. We know exactly what is available and what is possible. Compared to the other products available, Symantec is lacking in that department.

I've been using this solution for more than twenty years. While Endpoint Protection has only existed for the past couple of years, the Symantec antivirus, I have been working with more than twenty years. It used to be Symantec antivirus and then it changed a couple of years ago to Symantec Endpoint Protection. So, we've been using it obviously since its inception.

In terms of advice to others, I would say to partner with somebody that actually knows how the product is implemented and configured. Get a partner that has the technical knowledge and can give onsite technical guidance, or support. All of these Endpoint Protection solutions are getting very complex. It's not a simple antivirus that you just simply deploy to get a few viruses. It is becoming a very complex thing to implement. People buy the products, and they don't know how to implement them, so they go and slap them there and then they get burnt and they get attacked by a virus or threat or something. They get their fingers burnt and then they say the product is rubbish, but it's not the product, it's that the product was not correctly configured. So, when buying a product, you need to partner with someone who can actually provide you with support on the product.

They're one of my favorite products and we're actively working with Kaspersky, McAfee, Sophos, ESET, and Sophos. Palo Alto is my favorite firewall. But on the antivirus or Endpoint Protection side, I have the greatest of confidence in Symantec. It's something I would use at home or in the business. That's what we use to protect the business, so it's probably the product I have the most confidence in.

I would rate this solution ten out of ten.

I like the ability to push it to a client, centrally from central consoles.

I like the integration of Active Directory. I like the ability for it to auto-enroll. You can add machines to the Active Directory and when it configures right, it automatically installs to those machines.

The firewall features are pretty good as well. I like the firewall and the intrusion prevention features, and just the basic anti-malware and anti-virus seems to be pretty effective as well.

Sometimes the interface can be a bit cumbersome, and maybe the help features. If you're not charged with administering the product and you don't do it every day it can sometimes be difficult to remember how to do the simple basic things, so some type of help or guidance for your most regular or frequent tasks would be good. Something similar to what the product called Serviceaid has. 

I also think that the website itself should be improved. They have so many products that when you actually look on their website and you look for helpful guidance you just tend to get lost because they seem to have so much going on. So, basically, a bit more intuitive help and guidance features, as well as more intuitive service information.

Some type of solution for mobile devices would be good. For mobile devices, it's drawing from a Windows-based client, so for many core clients for OSX and Linux machines, those OS could be integrated directly. There's no client for mobile devices except for IOS and Android devices.

It's not very stable I don't think. I'll didn't have any problems when it did not work, or episodes of crashing or anything but yeah, it's not very stable.

We don't do daily scans, we do weekly scans but it is used daily and obviously, it's got a real-time scan so it's in constant use.

I think it's very scalable, and I think you can manage the implementation as long as it's sort of implemented on the right sort of baseline platform, etc. It makes it pretty easy to scale up and add lots more users and even more servers to the implementation. We do plan to add more clients onto the system in the future.

I haven't had much cause to use technical support. I might have used them only a few times. The support is okay, it's just difficult to actually find the contact numbers or email addresses because their site is so cumbersome.

I wouldn't say it was straightforward. There wasn't anything complex, either. Once you've done it once or twice, which I have, it's not as complex as it could be. It really depends on the size of the installation you're doing and the number of clients, etc. So obviously the bigger the installation, the more thought you need to put into it. I'd probably lean towards saying it was complex, it's not straightforward.

We have approximately fifty users and only one admin, so I'm the only person who administers here. I think the largest installation I've had would probably be about 1000G's with about one, two, three, four, five, six, no about seven administrators, but yeah and here it's just about fifty devices.

We do the implementation by ourselves.

I would advise anyone to make sure they do their required reading before they implement. Before implementation, you need to do the reading on the best practices because obviously if you've got a larger implementation then you need to think about a few concerns. You need to think about resilient managing services as well. Also, before purchasing,  do the due diligence and look at alternative products to see if there's something else that would suit your needs better.

This solution is a bit cumbersome. Some of the things they can make them easier to do, and also because their website is a bit clunky, so makes it difficult to find the solutions you need.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten.