We performed a comparison between CylancePROTECT and VIPRE Endpoint Security 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."We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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 product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting."
"In most cases, the solution's ability to detect in the MITRE framework, and its ability to be able to detect attacks in any one of seven or eight different areas of the life cycle of an attack is very useful."
"The solution is easy to deploy."
"The solution runs in the background, and I do not need to care about it."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"I rate the tool a ten out of ten when it comes to the ease of use or management part."
"The most valuable features of CylancePROTECT are its powerful machine-learning capabilities and predictive intelligence."
"Very easy to deploy. It can be done one by one or deployed by customizing an MSI file for GPO push."
"It has low overhead as far as machine resources are concerned. Everything runs faster with VIPRE installed versus some of the competitors. It has also been pretty easy to use. It just runs and gives us reports. It also sends us alerts when there is something that we need to look at. It does its job, and you just look at the reports. In other ways, you just forget that it is there."
"In general, it was pretty easy to manage."
"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."
"The support needs improvement."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"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"
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"It needs real analysis of quarantined files. The EDR product isn't showing much right now."
"The solution’s technical support could be improved."
"They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features."
"It was not effective. There were a lot of false positives, even when we use Adobe, and everybody uses Adobe, which is not a threat."
"The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting."
"The process of whitelisting a script that you want to be able to run can be a little bit difficult, or awkward."
"The product must make the interface a little more user-friendly."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"Their management interface is a little buggy. It requires a few system resources on the management interface. Its reporting can also be better. Overall, the reports are pretty good. They patch some third-party software, but if they can expand what they do for reporting and patch enterprise software, it would be handy."
"We would get a lot of false positives and instead of them fixing the false positive, they would just want us to put in an exception, which I didn't care for."
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews while VIPRE Endpoint Security is ranked 59th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while VIPRE Endpoint Security is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VIPRE Endpoint Security writes "Easy to deploy, good price, low overhead, and keeps our Servers and PC's free of virus'". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas VIPRE Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Norton Small Business. See our CylancePROTECT vs. VIPRE Endpoint Security 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.