We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The stability is very good."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"The most valuable feature at this moment is that Cisco AMP or Cisco Secure Endpoint solution is delivering a lot of things, and I always say to a lot of customers that if we didn't have Cisco AMP, we probably would have had ransomware somewhere. So, it's protecting us very well from a lot of hackers, malware, and especially ransomware."
"Its most valuable features are its scalability and advanced threat protection for customers."
"Device Trajectory is one of the most valuable features. We're able to dig in and really understand how things came to be and where to focus our efforts."
"I'm only using the AMP (advanced malware protection) which is protecting my file system from all the malicious things that might happen. It should protect all kinds of things that might happen on the servers, things that I cannot see."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"The stability of the solution is perfect. I believe it's the most stable solution on the market right now."
"The most valuable feature is the management of end-user machines."
"Containment is the best feature of the solution."
"Auto Containment is a valuable feature."
"It is a very stable solution, making it an excellent product."
"If you open up an application or a web browser, it puts a container in a sandbox area. So if there's some malicious code, it'll stick there. It also has way better protection for ransomware because it uses heuristics that are pretty effective. We've done a lot of tests with live malware, and it works really well."
"The tool is an open-source EDR with antivirus features. It also has remote support and patch management."
"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 stable and reliable."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"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."
"The support needs improvement."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"...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 GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"The pricing policy could be more competitive, similar to Cisco's offerings."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"The technical support is very slow."
"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 menu could be cleaned up."
"The product must provide a web filter to block websites based on specific categories."
"Their support is not very good because they are very late to reply."
"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."
"There could be MDRM features added to the product."
"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."
"The solution's online documentation needs to be fine-tuned. It is not up to which solution currently has. There is some inconsistency in the knowledge present. I would like to see MDM in the solution's future releases."
"Would be good to have a better understanding of what it is that you've got in quarantine."
More Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 22 reviews while Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is ranked 33rd in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 9 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Tighter integration with Umbrella and Firepower gave us eye-opening information". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection writes "Its sandboxing features help ensure security for us and our customers". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, whereas Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Fortinet FortiClient and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.