We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and N-able EDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)."The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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 ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"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 used to take us a month to find out that something is infected, we now know that same day, as soon it is infected."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"The product itself is pretty reliable. The security features that it has make it reliable."
"It's quite simple, and the advantage I see is that I get the trajectory of what happened inside the network, how a file has been transmitted to the workstation, and which files have got corrupted."
"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."
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us. The AI models and are good."
"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."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"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."
"Cisco is good in terms of threat intelligence plus machine learning-based solutions, but we feel Cisco is lagging behind in using artificial intelligence in its systems."
"It is not very stable because we have new versions four times a year, which fixes bugs. We had some problems with some deployments."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"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."
"In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."
"The product does not provide options like tunnel creation or virtual appliances."
"We have a lot of false positives we see in the dashboard. I think this is the only problem we are facing."
Earn 20 points
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 9th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 43 reviews while N-able EDR is ranked 57th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while N-able EDR is rated 0.0. 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 N-able EDR writes "Stable, effective rollback feature, and useful AI models". 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 N-able EDR is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Elastic Security, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Trend Vision One.
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.