We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Deep Instinct Prevention Platform 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."Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The stability is very good."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."
"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."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its technical support."
"For the initial first level of support, we provide it from our side. If there's escalation required, we use Cisco tech for the AMP. And again, they are perfect. I mean, one of the best, compared to any other vendors."
"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."
"I am told that we get over 100 million emails a month. This filters them down and allows only somewhere about three million emails, which is a great help."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"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."
"Its false positives are very low, because the behavior analysis engine double checks them."
"I like the dashboard. It looks very simple."
"The CPU consumption is low compared to what I have been using in my current environment, which is Sophos. The footprint is a lot smaller, about a quarter of Sophos. It is very small."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Deep Instinct's detection rate is close to 100 percent."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
"Deep Instinct was a strategic complement to our Open XDR platform."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"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 pricing policy could be more competitive, similar to Cisco's offerings."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"An easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful... That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"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 reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"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."
"If they can bring some additional, complementary solutions, like network scanning and the like, that will help. If they had some sort of a firewall which could help detect DDoS attacks and other things, it would be an improvement"
"The Management Console is not localized."
"When things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background... we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"I would like a little more training for the admins."
"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."
More Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 43 reviews while Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is ranked 21st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 18 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Single dashboard management, quick infrastructure threat detection, and high level support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform writes "Bolsters prevention with great detection and response capabilities". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Cisco Umbrella, whereas Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CylancePROTECT and Malwarebytes. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform 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.
