We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and Fortinet FortiClient based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This is stable and scalable."
"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"
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"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."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"It is very easy and useful. A normal user with basic information can easily connect to any environment."
"It supports securely connections for VPN users from outside our environment during the lockdown."
"It's pretty stable, and I don't have any problems with it."
"It is not at all interesting for me as a standalone product, but as a product that is integrated with FortiGate with all features, it is actually a great tool and a great experience. I had test installed FortiClient working from home. I remembered and knew which web categories were denied or allowed. All those policies were correctly reflected standalone, for example, on my laptop."
"The solution offers great stability."
"The most valuable feature is the single pane of glass, single point of management."
"The solution's TNA feature blocks devices from entering the network that do not meet compliance protocols."
"The initial setup is easy."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Detections could be improved."
"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"
"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."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"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 network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"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."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"We've had some problems with having to remove the current version and either reinstalling an old version or updating to the new one."
"FortiClient is not communicating with the new version of the firewall."
"Initially, the support was very poor. It is getting better, but they should continue to improve this."
"Cloud services are very expensive for us."
"I think that FortiClient can enhance the multifactor authentication."
"We do not use the solution every day and there are times when the new users have trouble reconnecting. The technology itself works but our users getting adopted to it is a major problem. Having the user adapt to the desktop landing page that it begins on is throwing them off a bit."
"The connectivity could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiClient should improve its visibility of the consumption of traffic and end-user action, which is very low."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 42nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 85 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Darktrace and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Ivanti Connect Secure. See our Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Fortinet FortiClient report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (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.