We performed a comparison between Cynet and Microsoft Defender for Identity 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 console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The dashboard is beautiful, overall easy of use, and the UBA and NBA features are valued."
"It can be deployed in autonomous mode, and then it automatically blocks malware threats."
"Advanced detection and protection against ransomware paired with SOC monitoring are the most valuable features. They have 24/7 SOC monitoring and file activity. It is a very robust tool."
"I like that it is possible to use the solution to check more information about the users' devices."
"This solution requires less management and is very easy to use."
"It provides good protection from ransomware and malware attacks. It is very good as compared to other products. If any threat is there, their support is very good. They immediately respond to the users and do a follow-up. They call us and also provide email support."
"It is quite stable. I would rate the stability of the solution a nine out of ten."
"A reliable security system that automatically quarantines anything suspicious."
"The solution offers excellent visibility into threats."
"It is easy to set up. Based on the number of devices you would like to set up, you can use scripts, Group Policy, etc. It takes five minutes to set up."
"The basic security monitoring at its core feature is the most valuable aspect. But also the investigative parts, the historical logging of events over the network are extremely interesting because it gives an in-depth insight into the history of account activity that is really easy to read, easy to follow, and easy to export."
"Defender for Identity has not affected the end-user experience."
"All the integration it has with different Microsoft packages, like Teams and Office, is good."
"This solution has advanced a lot over the last few years."
"The most valuable aspect is its connection to Microsoft Sentinel and Defender for Endpoint, and giving exact timelines for incidents and when certain events occured during an incident."
"It automates routine testing and helps automate the finding of high-value alerts."
"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."
"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."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Detections could be improved."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The solution is not stable."
"There could be more customization options and detailed information provided in the reports."
"Increased application for SOAR abilities across interconnected devices would be a welcome improvement."
"Sometimes, it is necessary for me to make important changes to a hard drive of a computer, and because Cynet does not allow me to do that, I have to go to the console and remove the computer from the security group just for Cynet. After that, I have to wait for 10 or 15 minutes for that to take effect. I would like to be able to disable Cynet locally. I shouldn’t have to go to the console to find the PC and then take it out of the group and then add it again to the group. I should locally be able to disable Cynet on a computer with a password or something like that, but it is currently not possible."
"I cannot provide more details about Cynet's automation features. While Cynet claims to be automated, the specifics of this automation are unclear. They claim to have a high capability to detect and block attacks, but I am cautious about companies that claim to solve every problem without limitations. It does help in identifying malware on the network but doesn't specifically identify vulnerabilities."
"Management of the console could be simplified and made more user-friendly because right now it's not very easy to use."
"I would like to see more emphasis on building the data lake and storing all endpoint data in the enterprise data lake so that data mining can be performed"
"The solution lacks URL filtering."
"One thing to note is that I highly recommend adding a deep learning-based prevention environment as an additional layer to Cynet. However, I always advise my customers to start with Cynet or XDR, for example, and then focus on the people, technology, and processes involved. This is the best approach to ensure that you are not breached with ransomware. While Cynet can prevent most attacks, there have been cases where ransomware has been quicker than Cynet's detection capabilities. In these situations, an additional tool is necessary to ensure complete protection, and that is what I sell as well."
"The impact of the sensors on the domain controllers can be quite high depending on your loads. I don't know if there's any room for improvement there, but that's one of the things that might be improved."
"The technical support needs significant improvement. Documentation for more minor issues in the form of guides or walkthroughs could help to resolve this issue. The number of tickets raised would decrease, removing some pressure from the support team and making it easier to clear the remaining tickets."
"And when you are working in a priority IP address, Identity is not able to know that those IPs are from the company. It sees that the IPs are from Taiwan or from Hong Kong or from India, even though they are internal IPs, resulting in a lot of false positives."
"I would like to be able to do remediation from the platform because it is just a scanner right now. If you onboard a device, it shows you what is happening, but you can't use it to fix things. You need to go into the system to fix it instead."
"One potential area for improvement could be exploring flexibility in the installation of Microsoft Defender for Identity agents."
"Microsoft should look at what competing vendors like CrowdStrike and Broadcom are doing and incorporate those features into Sentinel and Defender. At the same time, I think the intelligence inside the product is improving fast. They should incorporate more zero-trust and hybrid trust approaches. They need to build up threat intelligence based on threats and methods used in attacks on other companies."
"There is no option to remedy an issue directly from the console. If we see an alert, we can't fix it from the console. Instead, we must depend on other Microsoft products, such as MDE. That is a significant drawback. It simply works as a scanner, which can sometimes put enough load on the sensors. Immediate actions should be possible from the dashboard because. It can prevent issues from spreading further."
"The solution could be better at using group-managed access and they could replace it with broad-based access controls."
More Microsoft Defender for Identity Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cynet is ranked 15th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 35 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Identity is ranked 1st in Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) with 13 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Defender for Identity is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Identity writes "Offers robust protection from insider threats, but the customer support is poor". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Defender for Identity is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID Protection, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Microsoft Entra Verified ID, Splunk User Behavior Analytics and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our Cynet vs. Microsoft Defender for Identity 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.
