We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Microsoft Entra ID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are the Windows Firewall and the regular virus definition updates. These features are very helpful and have helped to improve our security."
"The fact that it's from Microsoft, you don't have many false positives, unlike products from other vendors might have."
"It has Kusto Query Language (KQL), so we can use our own queries to find anything."
"Microsoft Defender can block some viruses or malware. So, it can protect my files. It can save files on Office 365 OneDrive. I use encryption for some files, then I can recover them from OneDrive."
"I am using it for very simple purposes. It is perfect and quite effective. I have been using it for a while, and I have never had any virus infection, data leak, or other security breaches. It works fine for standalone purposes. If you log on to OneDrive, it has ransomware protection."
"This is not an inventory solution, but it helps you take count of how many workstations you have, as well as what software is installed on each of them."
"DFE organizational security posture has been a positive experience. We're a Microsoft house. It works. Once it's deployed and once it's configured, it works and our clients tend to be happy with it. I haven't really experienced anyone who has been so unsatisfied with the platform that they wanted to go a couple of different directions, that has never happened to me."
"The best thing I like about it is its interaction with the other Defender products. It provides the ability to push telemetry up. It gives me endpoint visibility and allows me to take automated actions."
"With Azure Conditional Access you can specify network locations where you want some of the services in the organization to be available to users, and where you don't want users to have access."
"The most valuable feature is the authentication platform."
"It's very easy to run and it's part of their ecosystem and I don't think it's going anywhere anytime soon."
"Having access to Azure Active Directory on the cloud gives us speed and use of the latest technology. The application services are very good, such as GitHub."
"What I like is that I can go anywhere, at any time, and to any client premise, and I can simply log in to the admin panel and can serve any of my clients."
"Privileged Identity Management (PIM), managed identities, dynamic groups, and extension and security attributes are all great features."
"The central authentication server is most valuable. GPOs are useful for user and computer policies."
"The most valuable feature is Identity and Access Management. As an IT administrator, this feature allows me to manage access for users and groups."
"I would like to see integrations with other products, such as Spunk and other CM solutions. That would create possibilities for me, and for a SOC, to consolidate all events in an older console, not one provided by Microsoft but provided by a third party, and use it to create more insights."
"I think Microsoft needs to improve some of the security aspects of Defender. The email part, in particular, needs to be improved in terms of security effectiveness."
"We would like more customization."
"It is currently more suitable for end-users rather than enterprises with lots of other processes and third-party tools. It needs improvement on that front. We had many issues while integrating it with our enterprise solutions, such as Splunk, and third-party tools. It provides everything via APIs. Other vendors provide integration with third-party tools, but Microsoft doesn't do that. It is also logging too much and is not serialized from the process aspect. It has all the data, but it is not in a proper format or not properly indexed, which doesn't make it easier for enterprises to use this data. Other vendors provide troubleshooting information that can be used to troubleshoot issues, but Microsoft doesn't provide anything like that."
"The anti-ransomware features need to be improved upon."
"Its detection is not as quick. There should also be more frequent updates."
"Defender is free for one year. Once that year is over, we will switch to Kaspersky."
"There's scanning going on that occasionally topples the memory, causing everything to freeze. This should be fixed."
"There is a lot of room for improvement in terms of its integration with the local Active Directory. There are some gaps in terms of the local Active Directory through which Microsoft is syncing our environment from our data center. There should be the availability of custom attributes on Azure Active Directory. In addition, there should be the availability of security groups and distribution groups that are residing on the local Active Directory. Currently, they are not replicated on Azure Active Directory by default."
"Azure AD could be more robust and adopt a saturated model, where they can offer unlimited support for a multi-cloud environment."
"My understanding is, in the future, they will be able to bring everything into one single platform and they are not there yet."
"The solution has certain limitations. For example, it has very little governance functionality."
"I haven't had any issues with the product."
"The management interface has some areas that need improvement."
"There is a concept of cross-tenant trust relationships, which I believe Microsoft is actively pursuing. That is something which in the coming days and years to come by will be very key to the success of Azure Active Directory, because many organizations are going into mergers and acquisitions or spinning off new companies. They will still have to access the old tenant information because of multiple legal reasons, compliance reasons, and all those things. So, there should be some level of tenant-level trust functionality, where you can bring people from other tenants to access some part of your tenant application. So, that is an area which is growing. I believe Microsoft is actively pursuing this, and it will be an interesting piece."
"Documentation I think is always the worst part with what Azure's doing right now across the board."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 5th in Microsoft Security Suite with 182 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 4th in Microsoft Security Suite with 190 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. 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 Microsoft Entra ID writes "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco Duo and Okta Workforce Identity. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.
In recent years Microsoft has really upped its game with Defender and Intune. As core cyber-security for an SME, keeping just to Microsoft is now a real option. The challenge is understanding the gaps / cyber security service weaknesses (if they exist) in comparison with other vendors such as ESET, Malwarebytes, Trend Micro, etc.
Azure AD Services, Defender for Endpoint, and Intune are all Microsoft products, but it is important to understand how each product works as they may not be compatible and there may be some limitations.
Devices managed through Intune may not have all of the Defender for Endpoint features. Some advanced features such as automated investigation and remediation may only be available for devices that are enrolled in Defender for Endpoint standalone.
In addition, Azure AD and Intune have different requirements for device enrollment and management. Intune requires devices to be enrolled and managed through an MDM solution, while Azure AD provides basic device management capabilities but may not support all of the features available in Intune.
Lastly, there may be limitations to how user identities and access are managed between Azure AD and Intune. Some features that are available in Azure AD, such as conditional access policies, may not suit Intune, and additional configuration may be required to ensure that user identities and access are properly managed across both services.
If anyone out there has other experiences, please let me know!
It depends on your company's infrastructure. Check with your cyber team whether you can sync your endpoints to Cloud using Azure AD as Azure Registered/ Azure Hybrid AD join/ Azure AD join, etc.
1. So, if the ask is only to enroll them in Intune to leverage defender/BitLocker services - go directly to Azure AD's join approach.
2. If you still want to manage patch management/mcm BitLocker but Defender via cloud, the approach should be Azure Hybrid AD join.
3. You can still use autopilot using both of these approaches.
I believe it is a good first step, and I would say even a requirement, but in no way is it a comprehensive security solution, even for endpoints.
There are many things that need to be addressed for security. In addition to this, there is XDR, MDR, more comprehensive AV for endpoints & Servers that stop attacks, Threat Hunting, Mitigation, PEN Testing, Security Training for end users, Multi-Factor Authentication (Microsoft's MFA is good but only for Microsoft products), Patch Management for Endpoints, Servers and Cloud Workloads, Network Access Control, Firewalls for On-Premise and Cloud server workloads, Network Segmentation, Password Management, Data Backups (3-2-1-1 Rule) with Immutable Backups, Power Backups, Physical Security, Monitoring, NOC/SOC services, and working towards a Zero Trust architecture...
But there are no single-point solutions that will make you secure, so don't get complacent. And you can outspend your profits if you do everything. Just remember it's best to have a layered approach that works together and looks at everything from a security perspective and how it integrates with your overall security plans and objectives to help identify holes and possible mitigations.
Healthcare must do Risk Assessments by law, but I recommend that all companies of all sizes do at least annual risk assessments since there is so such thing as being too small or inconspicuous to be hit with malware or have a cyber security attack since much of the delivery is automated and not just by the script-kiddies of years gone by... Nation States are actively engaging in cyber warfare daily, along with terrorists, and opportunists looking to make big money from you...