We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and SonicWall Capture Client 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."It is stable and scalable."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 setup is pretty simple."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The stability is very good."
"The solution provides protection for all our systems, file servers, endpoints and domain controllers."
"The user interface is easy to maintain once it is setup."
"I like the security that this solution provides."
"The most valuable feature is the central view. With this view, I can see all of the data."
"The security is very good, compared to some other products."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The most valuable features in Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business are protection and encryption. Additionally, the interface is good and it can be integrated with Windows, Linux, and Mac."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides total security, everything in one."
"The most valuable features of SonicWall Capture Client are CSC (Capture Security Center), RTDMI (Real-Time Deep Memory Inspection), and the deep memory inspection feature."
"Overall, what I love the most about SonicWall Capture Client is its management console. SonicWall Capture Client also has the intelligence to tell you which computer is online, what OS it uses, etc. I also found the rollback feature and SentinelOne integration valuable in SonicWall Capture Client. Rollback is a powerful feature of the solution because it's similar to locking your endpoint during an attack, so you won't have to pay the hackers, particularly during ransomware attacks. That feature in SonicWall Capture Client allows you to get back your endpoint or make your endpoint right again after an attack. I also like that it isn't complex to remove the engine error from the endpoint because you only have to provide the security key from SonicWall Capture Client, so the process is simple. It's not complex."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"SonicWall Capture Client has a serial number to connect to your firewall."
"SonicWall Capture Client's scalability is nice."
"The solution serves as a very stable platform."
"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."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The solution is not stable."
"From time to time, some users loose connection via the Network Agent."
"The stability could be better."
"The need to re-engineer the source code to reduce CPU and memory usage. Other areas for improvement include a data-loss prevention solution, enhanced application control, enhanced device control, an endpoint encryption solution, an advanced persistent threats (APT) solution, and an all-in-one solution with one pricing scheme for corporate and enterprise business needs."
"I would like the solution to be able to allow to have end to end security services from the final user to the server."
"The solution sometimes slows down the computers of our clients, the performance needs to improve."
"This solution would be improved if it were more compatible with Windows Server. There is not a client for Windows Server, like for Windows Workstation, so there are a lot of things you cannot control from the local system, or from the desktop directly. You have to control everything from the policy server, not from the client's side. The interface is kind of light, and it's not good—it could be more user-friendly."
"The application updates and drive encryption are lacking."
"Utilizing the CPU usages during the scan process needs to be improved."
"The biggest issue with SonicWall Capture Client is network latency."
"SonicWall Capture Client could be made a little lighter than it currently is in terms of memory consumption."
"It takes technical support too long to resolve an issue."
"They should improve their user interface."
"An area for improvement in SonicWall Capture Client is TenantCloud support. Suppose you want to implement SonicWall Capture Client. You'll have to register it on MySonicWall. Then once your SonicWall Capture Client license expires and you don't want to renew it, you can't delete it from your MySonicWall account, so that's an area for improvement."
"The vulnerability reports need to be better. Windows Defender detected some issues that SonicWall Capture Client couldn't."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews while SonicWall Capture Client is ranked 49th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 6 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while SonicWall Capture Client is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall Capture Client writes "A stable solution that is used for endpoint security and to protect computers from malware". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, whereas SonicWall Capture Client is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. SonicWall Capture Client 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.