We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"The stability is very good."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"The product provides sandboxing options like file reputation and file analysis."
"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 most valuable feature of the solution is its technical support."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"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 most valuable features are the reports."
"My impression of the stability of this solution is good. We have not had any issues with stability."
"The integration with our hypervisor is quite smooth, especially within the Kaspersky Enterprise environment. We have many virtual machines, and the integration is helpful."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is a stable solution."
"EDR's most valuable feature is its basic protection from malware and viruses."
"The most valuable feature is endpoint protection."
"We compared Kaspersky and Trend Micro. The latter is significantly more expensive. That's the main difference."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pros →
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"Detections could be improved."
"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 integration of the Cisco products for security could be better in the sense that not everything is integrated, and they aren't working together. In addition, not all products are multi-tenant, so you can't separate different customer environments from each other, which makes it a little bit hard for a managed service provider to deliver services to the customers."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"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."
"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."
"Logging could be better in terms of sending more logs to Cisco Firepower or Cisco ASA. That's an area where it could be made better."
"In terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"The product does not provide options like tunnel creation or virtual appliances."
"It's pretty good as it is, but its cost could be improved."
"It is not easy to follow the kill chain of a potential infection or malware."
"We'd like more integrations to be available in the future."
"The solution is expensive."
"The main problem with Endpoint is that Kaspersky is a Russian company, and my clients prefer not to use it."
"It consumes many system resources."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is very heavy on the system resources. It uses a lot of memory and the system can become slow."
"Kaspersky needs to strengthen its standing in the market."
"There are some issues with EDR's web policy blocking sites that are marked as exceptions."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Cons →
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 9th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 43 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is ranked 17th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is rated 8.2. 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert writes "Solid security and performance; overall a useful tool". 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is most compared with Trend Vision One, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cynet, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and IBM Security QRadar. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
