Marian MelniciucSenior IT System Administrator at ScanPlus GmbH
Anonymous UserSenior Technical Product Manager at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable features of this solution are the IPS and the integration with ISE."
"The simplicity of use is its most valuable feature. You can very clearly see things."
"The stability of the solution is perfect. I believe it's the most stable solution on the market right now."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"It is a very stable program."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature is the management of end-user machines."
"It really protects and does its job. It totally blocked every attack attempt, and no attack attempt was successful."
"They offer the whole package. Remote monitoring and management (RMM) is included with it, which is pretty nice. They also have Windows patching and third-party patching. It was easy to use for protection. The containment engine was pretty nice for securing our environment."
"It's a very easy-to-use product."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"In the next release, I would for it to have back up abilities. I would like the ability to go back to a point in time to when my PC was uninfected and to the moment of when the infection happened."
"The reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"The technical support is very slow."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"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."
"Their support is not very good because they are very late to reply."
"They need to enhance the performance of the agents. Currently, the performance is going low when the agent starts a full scan. The agent is consuming a lot of resources while scanning. When there are a lot of documents to check, it slows down the endpoint. This is the only thing that worries me about Comodo, but this issue is also there in other products. It is missing DLP, and I know that they are working on adding some data loss prevention capabilities. They have added some capabilities, but these capabilities are not yet mature. I hope they will enhance these capabilities because it is important to prevent the data from going out from inside. We are protected from the outside, but we also have to be protected from the inside out."
"They need to just modernize the infrastructure with something that is next-generation. We have recently moved to SentinelOne. It had been doing good for us for a while, but we needed something modern with new technology."
"The licensing fees are high. The company should work to try to lower them for the customer."
"The costs of 50 licenses of AMP for three years is around $9,360."
"The price is very good."
"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."
"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."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"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."
"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 Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"The price of this product should be lower."
"It was about 35 or 40 bucks per year for the 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.
Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection (AEP) delivers patent-pending auto-containment, where unknown executables and other files that request runtime privileges are automatically run in a virtual contain that does not have access to the host system's resources or user data.
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 17 reviews while Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is ranked 24th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 4 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "We have gained more visibility into what's going on because it detects a lot of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection writes "Flexible, easy-to-use, and scales well". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Carbon Black CB Defense, SentinelOne and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is most compared with Sophos Intercept X, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra and Blackberry Protect. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection 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.