We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business)."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"
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"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."
"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."
"The VPN is most valuable. It's the best thing in the market today. We can use two-factor authentication with another platform, and we can authenticate with two-factor."
"There are no issues or drops in the solution's performance...The solution's technical support was helpful."
"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."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"The most valuable feature right now is the user control."
"The most valuable feature of McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is data loss prevention."
"The interface showcases threat incidents very well."
"The stability of the solution can be good. However, the configuration takes a long time for it to be done properly."
"The initial setup process was easy."
"The administrative capabilities and the interface make this product accessible and easy to use."
"It can scale."
"The overall features of McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention are very good."
More McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Pros →
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"The solution is not stable."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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."
"The support needs improvement."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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 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 initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"It's pretty good as it is, but its cost could be improved."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"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."
"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."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"It could improve how it deals with solar data."
"McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention needs to improve the resources it uses for CPU and RAM."
"When this solution is used it requires a lot of administration because the users can have difficulties using it and require assistance. The administrators are continuously modifying the policies for the users. Technical support will be used frequently."
"There are a lot of vulnerabilities and viruses and malware can proliferate."
"The initial setup is very complex."
"In my experience, it's not really user-friendly for me, in terms of how I navigate with the ePolicy Orchestrator. They need to upgrade their management console."
"Integration with other vendors could be improved. For example, with Chrome or Firefox."
"Lacks GDPR regulations to enhance security."
More McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Cons →
More McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 43 reviews while McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is ranked 9th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 29 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is rated 7.4. 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 McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention writes "Highly beneficial DLP functionality, full system protection, and useful file scanning". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention, HP Wolf Security, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Digital Guardian.
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.