We performed a comparison between Cynet and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response 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 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."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The stability is very good."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The interface is exceptionally clear and easy to understand."
"We are very satisfied with the level of performance we get."
"Cynet's most valuable features are laptop and server performance, internal network monitoring, and external firewall lock management."
"It is quite stable. I would rate the stability of the solution a nine out of ten."
"We are using almost all of the features and we find it quite good overall."
"It can be deployed in autonomous mode, and then it automatically blocks malware threats."
"The level of automation is very good because the majority of the time, it blocks the attacks without requiring anything from our side. The technicians don't have to do anything. They are just alerted about what happened. So, the user intelligence works quite well."
"Its ability to revert back from a previous state is quite notable. This feature is particularly valuable because, for maintaining integrity, it can inspect the socket for any firewall modifications. In practice, it allows us to return to a previous configuration when everything was functioning correctly."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It offers good scalability."
"The only issue that we have today is with false positives. We have too many false positives with the solution."
"I use the solution to protect our infrastructure. The tool has special frames for banking. There is an additional secure filter for banking-related pages. It protects me from viruses, malware, and attacks."
"WithSecure includes an encrypted drive that stores a key for accessing the encrypted data."
"The product is stable."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Pros →
"Detections could be improved."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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 solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The inability to add contact information inside the Cynet is also an issue because it makes things more complicated. I would like to have a simple feature to enter a contact name and number for the person taking care of that unit or that server."
"They have automated response capability, and they're moving more and more into SOAR capability. They have built-in deception technology with host-file users, phantoms, etc. We used to call them honeypots. So, they're on target. They're doing a really good job, and they should continue to improve with SOAR."
"We'd like something that makes it easier to manage specific points."
"A support center in Asia is needed."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support. The support should be faster to respond."
"I would like to see support for mobile protection and some additional reports included."
"The reporting functionality in Cynet may not be as comprehensive or flexible as desired."
"In future releases, I would like to see cloud security aspects included."
"The tool’s mobile version needs to be improved."
"The website rules are too complicated."
"The monthly reporting feature of WithSecure can be improved."
"Its automated functionality could be better."
"WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is scalable. My company has 800-1000 customers."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Cons →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cynet is ranked 14th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 35 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 31st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Includes an encrypted drive that stores a key for accessing the encrypted data, but the monthly reporting feature can be improved". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Vision One, Elastic Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. See our Cynet vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and 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.