We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"It is a very stable program."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"It provides good insight into the programs, applications, or websites that may need attention."
"It is extremely simple to manage and deploy."
"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 non-daily requirement to update signatures is the most valuable feature. From a functional point of view, it is pretty spot on. For instance, we compared an algorithm from five years ago to today's algorithm, and it was 98% accurate. It has the ability to detect and mitigate. In the industrial environment that we work in, there's what we call OT versus IT. You are IT Central, but this is OT. Generally, we don't have the same level of skillset as IT individuals or IT professionals have. This particular product doesn't require you to be a computer scientist to be able to understand its proprietary algorithm and to be able to deploy, use, and work within it. It integrates well with a robust SIEM or SOAR solution, and it plays nice with others. We use other detection solutions like CyberX or site provision with Cisco, and it plays nice. That's one of the things we really liked about it."
"Has good RAM capacity for the power I need"
"It does a good job of protecting us."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"I have not received any complaints about the performance."
"Technical support is excellent."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"The technical support is very slow."
"...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"Having worked with SentinelOne, Cylance is good, however, it probably needs to add a feature similar to SentinelOne's rollback functionality. With this feature, if you get infected, with a click, you can go back to the pre-infection state. If Cylance could add this functionality to their offering as well, that would be ideal."
"We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard."
"It could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions. This is the industrial environment where you have a control center for all the automation that's happening, whether it is oil, gas, or chemical manufacturing. They often have to set up a computer at the back and watch the other stuff to get alerts. In these autonomous or on-premises environments, they often don't have access to email readily. Integration with other industrial solutions, such as HMIS, will allow them to communicate and get an alert that something has been found. This way, they can react to it sooner than having somebody watch the screen and keep checking the screen. Rockwell has its own suite. Similarly, Honeywell has its own suite. There's also an independent HMI/historian solution provider out there called VTSCADA. We actually get asked if we can get it to show up on a screen, which is difficult. Getting those alerts to work within an industrial environment would be a huge plus."
"It's a good solution but some features just need to be updated."
"I would like to see them fix the alerting system so that the endpoint reporting is a bit more streamlined."
"The initial deployment was quite complicated."
"It should have better support for Windows and Mac."
"They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features."
"I would like to see more local integration for the applications that we use."
"Intrusion detection and intervention seem to be falling behind the competition."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
"There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"The monthly fee is $55 USD per user."
"I think that the price we are paying is good for what it is."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"We pay our license on a yearly basis and have just renewed for two years."
"It's not so heavily priced; rather, it's average and decent."
"This cost of the license is approximately $5 USD monthly per user."
"Licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis."
"MVISION is intended as an enterprise product and it is priced like one. This solution is within the price range of competitors at the enterprise level."
"The pricing is mid-ranged and quite reasonable compared to other similar products."
"It is based on an annual subscription."
"Customers would need to purchase a license. If a customer purchases an MVISION Endpoint license, he may use that license to install ENS. It's a flexible license where you have the option to either use the McAfee security software or the Windows Defender managed by McAfee, which is MVISION Endpoint."
Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.
BlackBerry® Protect is an artificial intelligence (AI) based endpoint protection platform (EPP) that prevents breaches and provides added controls for safeguarding against sophisticated cyberthreats—no human intervention, Internet connections, signature files, heuristics or sandboxes required.
McAfee MVISION Endpoint delivers enhanced detection and correction capabilities to augment native Microsoft Windows security controls, which are always up to date. Machine learning, credential theft monitoring, and rollback remediation boost the basic security built into the Windows and effectively combat advanced, zero-day threats.
Blackberry Protect is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 17 reviews while McAfee MVISION Endpoint is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 6 reviews. Blackberry Protect is rated 8.0, while McAfee MVISION Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Blackberry Protect writes "An outstanding product that is pretty spot on and easy to deploy and use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee MVISION Endpoint writes "This recognized brand has been reliable in the past but seems to be losing ground to competition". Blackberry Protect is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Carbon Black CB Defense and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response, whereas McAfee MVISION Endpoint is most compared with McAfee Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Sophos Intercept X and Trend Micro Apex One. See our Blackberry Protect vs. McAfee MVISION Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (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.