We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it."
"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."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"It is a very stable program."
"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."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"Some of the valuable features I have found are the online documentation of the solution is well organized and thorough. I like the simplicity of bypass and the visualization of the active components."
"It is stable and easy to set up."
"It has intelligent learning behind it and we have been very successful in preventing attacks."
"The threat analysis functionality is good."
"There's lots of very useful documentation online to help troubleshoot and learn about the product."
"The product allows us to focus on endpoint and antivirus protection."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years."
"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"...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."
"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 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 had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"Occasionally, we'll have issues with the latest version and they'll basically tell us that they will improve it in the next iteration. They need to work on their version release quality."
"In the next release, it would help if we can get better control over containers."
"I would like to see improvements made so that we can better see all of the processes."
"In the past, we've seen some stability issues in the latest version releases. We tend to hang back one version just to make sure issues are fully resolved to avoid user disruption."
"I'm not sure as to the logic of how we've decided to customize it. We've only really used it since February and therefore there may be more to do on that front. That's why it's hard to say if something is missing or if we just aren't utilizing it."
"The feature set for the firewall needs improvement."
"At this point, we're test-bedding several other providers right now to see if there's anything that does equally or better and that comes at a better price point."
"As far as I know, Carbon Defense has nothing that can be installed on mobile devices. It lacks a defense solution for mobile devices, especially mobile tablets. I would like to see support for mobile devices and the pricing should be less than the pricing for a normal workstation."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"The Deep Instinct client stops working when you have two servers and you add high availability or Windows Failover Cluster mode. It doesn't work in a clustered mode. I haven't yet had time to go back and talk with their support and get it fixed. It would be good if they can make the installation independent of an actual user. Currently, its installation is dependent on the actual user being logged in. For example, a computer has to be logged in for the installation to happen. If it is not logged in, then on the cloud platform, it is going to show that the client is offline. On the management side of the cloud platform, we would like to have the administrators segregated by logical entities. We have told them that on their cloud management platform, we would like to be able to segregate clients into different logical entities or organizations so that the administrators are able to manage only those entities that are within their designated organization."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"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."
"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 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."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing."
"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 [is] more or less the same as other similar solutions."
"We have branches, we have different companies, but we cannot buy less than 100 licenses. This does not make sense to me... It should be more flexible. I can understand their saying, "Okay, to be a customer you need 100," but to add on to that number it should be something very straightforward. If I need to add five, for example, I shouldn't need to add 100."
"It's reasonable in price"
"The price for the solution is completely at government level, meaning one which is very high."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
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.
CB Defense is an industry-leading next-generation antivirus (NGAV) and endpoint detection and response (EDR) solution. CB Defense is delivered through the CB Predictive Security Cloud, an endpoint protection platform that consolidates security in the cloud using a single agent, console and data set. CB Defense is certified to replace AV and designed to deliver the best endpoint security with the least amount of administrative effort. It protects against the full spectrum of modern cyber attacks, including the ability to detect and prevent both known and unknown attacks. CB Defense leverages the powerful capabilities of the CB Predictive Security Cloud, applying our unique streaming analytics to unfiltered endpoint data in order to predict, detect, prevent, respond to and remediate cyber threats. In addition, CB Defense provides a suite of response and remediation tools, including Live Response, which allows security personnel to perform remote live investigations, intervene with ongoing attacks and instantly remediate endpoint threats. For peace of mind, CB Defense customers can also leverage CB ThreatSight, Carbon Black’s managed threat alert service, to validate alerts and uncover new threats.
Deep Instinct is the first and only company applying end-to-end deep learning to cybersecurity. Deep learning is inspired by the brain’s ability to learn. Once a brain learns to identify an object, its identification becomes second nature. Similarly, as Deep Instinct’s artificial deep neural network brain learns to prevent any type of cyber threat, its prediction capabilities become instinctive. As a result, any kind of malware, known and new, first-seen malware, zero-days, ransomware and APT attacks from any kind are predicted and prevented in zero-time with unmatched accuracy and speed anywhere in the enterprise – Network, endpoint, Mobile – enabling multi-layered protection. To learn more, visit: https://www.deepinstinct.com.
Carbon Black CB Defense is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 21 reviews while Deep Instinct is ranked 29th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 5 reviews. Carbon Black CB Defense is rated 7.6, while Deep Instinct is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Carbon Black CB Defense writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Deep Instinct writes "A great threat-prevention solution that is light, simple to use, and easy to deploy and administer". Carbon Black CB Defense is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Carbon Black CB Response and Secureworks Red Cloak Threat Detection and Response, whereas Deep Instinct is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike Falcon, Blackberry Protect and Tanium. See our Carbon Black CB Defense vs. Deep Instinct 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.