We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
552,407 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"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 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.""If somebody has been compromised, the question always is: How has it affected other devices in the network? Cisco AMP gives you a very neat view of that.""It is a very stable program.""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 is signature-based malware detection.""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.""The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros »

"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic.""The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing.""The dashboard is customizable.""It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else.""The behavior-based detection feature is valuable.""The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward.""Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution.""Stability is one of the features we like the most."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pros »

"Cybereason absolutely enables us to mitigate and isolate on the fly. Our managed detection response telemetry has dropped dramatically since we began using it. It's very top-of-mind. We were running some tabletop exercises and none of the detections were getting triggered by the managed security services provider. So we needed to find a solution that would trigger high-fidelity alerts. That was Cybereason and it dramatically changed our landscape from the detection and response perspective.""The solution is efficient.""The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI.""For me, the technical support is good.""The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."

More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pros »

Cons
"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.""The technical support is very slow.""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 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.""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.""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.""I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics.""The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons »

"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well.""It is not a suitable solution if you are looking for a single product with multiple features such as DLP, encryption, rollback, etc.""I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications.""It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint.""There's an overall lack of features.""In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution.""It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support.""In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Cons »

"The product's reporting isn't great.""Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group.""Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on.""The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved.""Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."

More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work.""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.""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 is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it.""Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.""The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable.""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.""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."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there.""Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider.""The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year.""It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis.""The price is on the higher side, but it's okay.""The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive.""If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them.""The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice »

"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper.""In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."

More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
552,407 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
Top Answer: Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
Top Answer: The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
Top Answer: Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks.… more »
Top Answer: Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions… more »
Top Answer: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface… more »
Top Answer: It's not the cheapest, but it's the best. There are no additional costs to standard licensing.
Top Answer: We use Cybereason for endpoint detection, response, and protection.
Top Answer: The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI.
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
Learn More
Overview

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.

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the world's first detection and response app that natively integrates network, endpoint and cloud data to stop sophisticated attacks. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks accurately detects threats with behavioral analytics and reveals the root cause to speed up investigations.

Cybereason's Endpoint Detection and Response platform detects in real-time both signature and non-signature-based attacks and accelerates incident investigation and response. Cybereason connects together individual pieces of evidence to form a complete picture of a malicious operation.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
Learn more about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
Learn more about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response
Sample Customers
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company19%
Government13%
Manufacturing Company13%
Financial Services Firm6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider24%
Computer Software Company23%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm13%
Computer Software Company13%
Consumer Goods Company13%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company24%
Comms Service Provider22%
Government7%
Energy/Utilities Company4%
REVIEWERS
Manufacturing Company29%
Transportation Company14%
Insurance Company14%
Financial Services Firm14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company30%
Comms Service Provider23%
Financial Services Firm6%
Insurance Company5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise51%
REVIEWERS
Small Business44%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise36%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise49%
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise80%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
552,407 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 6th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 28 reviews while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 26th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 5 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2, while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Has a centralized console and does predictive analysis of malware". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "Does a phenomenal job in detecting anomalous behavior on the network and alerting us immediately". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, SentinelOne and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace and Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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.