We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."
"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 solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"It is stable and scalable."
"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."
"Previously, we had some processes related to incident response which required more steps. We needed to upload to VirusTotal, Sandbox, et cetera. Now, this process is shortened because all of the information we need is already in SentinelOne. We can briefly analyze and even respond from one management console. If someone has SOC, using the API, they can control everything. It's very cool. I think this is the future."
"The best thing SentinelOne has done for us is that it gives us insight into the endpoints. We never had insight into lateral movement threats before. Once a threat known as Qbot gets on the network, it actually spreads throughout sub-networks quickly. SentinelOne has detected that and saved our bacon. We were able to get in there and stop the threat, lock it down, and prevent it from actually spreading through. It would have been 50 or 60 computers. It had spread through in a few minutes. We have a lot of HIPAA data and FERPA data that we need to keep protected."
"SentinelOne also provides equal protection across Windows, Linux, and macOS. I have all of them and every flavor of them you could possibly imagine. They've done a great job because I still have a lot of legacy infrastructure to support. It can support legacy environments as well as newer environments, including all the latest OS's... There are cost savings not only on licensing but because I don't have to have different people managing different consoles."
"In terms of the engines that SentinelOne uses, it has stopped various scripts from running and it's highlighted lateral movement that we weren't expecting."
"The solution is powerful because we just have to update the agent by using the console, which is simple to do. I just select the endpoints and click "Update" on the console. That is it, because it is very easy to use."
"The best part of the agent is that users can't remove or disable it, so endpoints will be safe. I can control it from the portal. I can see when it's updated and I can push updates from the portal. The greatness of SentinelOne is that our end-users don't see anything to do with the agents. Some of them don't even know it's on their laptops. And that's a good thing."
"The Storyline feature has significantly affected our incident response time. Originally, what would take us hours, now it takes us several minutes."
"One of the features that convinced us to adopt SentinelOne was that the solution can recognize and respond to attacks with or without a network connection. That is very important."
"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."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"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."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"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."
"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 greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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"
"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."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"Generally, the stability is good, but I would like to see better stability from the solution. The stability issue is partially a con of a behavioral-based product, but being behavioral-based, it also has a lot of pros."
"Periodically we have an application that does not work correctly when SentinelOne is installed, yet performs as expected when SentinelOne is removed."
"I would like to improve the reports because they are not so customizable and we would like more info from them."
"If it had a little bit more granularity in the roles and responsibilities matrix, that would help. There are users that have different components, but I'd be much happier if I could cherry-pick what functions I want to give to which users. That would be a huge benefit."
"The solution’s distributed intelligence at the endpoint is pretty effective, but from time to time I see that the agent is not getting the full execution history or command-line parameters. I would estimate the visibility into an endpoint is around 80 percent. There is 20 percent you don't see because, for some reason, the agents don't get all of the information."
"All they need to do to improve it is for it to grow further. The hackers don't sleep. If the hackers don't sleep, the solution continually needs to be updated. They need to keep ahead of the hackers."
"In terms of improvement, they should work on agents' updates because that is not a strong part. It's not their strong point. It's not straightforward to upgrade agents. I send them questions about it. They already worked on this and they promised that in the next release that they will show me their solution for it. But this year I have had complaints about agents' updates, that they aren't clear."
"One of the areas which would benefit from being improved is the policies. There are still software programs where we need to manually program in the policies to tell the system, "This program is legitimate." Some level of AI-based automation in creating those policies would go a long way in improving the amount of time it takes to deploy the system."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"There are no issues with the pricing."
"You have to look at the kinds of problems you can end up with and the fact that you want security against them, and then SentinelOne is not expensive."
"The pricing is very reasonable."
"Our licensing fees are about $5 USD per endpoint, per month."
"We are on a subscription model by choice. Therefore, we are paying a premium for the flexibility. We would have huge cost savings if we committed to a three-year buy-in. So, it's more expensive than the other solutions that we were looking at, but we have the flexibility of a subscription model. I think the pricing is fair. For example, if we had a three-year tie-in SentinelOne versus Cylance or one of the others, there is not that much difference in pricing. There might be a few euro or dollars here and there, but it's negligible."
"The pricing is very fair for the solution they provide."
"SentinelOne is more affordable than some competing products, and it's not overly expensive for what you're getting."
"It was cheaper than McAfee, which was a way to convince management to go with the solution."
"The pricing level for this service and application was very interesting for us. I don't know exactly what the price was, but apparently it was a big surprise that the SOC was also included in our pricing model."
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.
Advanced attacks can take just minutes, if not seconds, to compromise the endpoints. First-generation endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools simply cannot keep pace. They require manual triage and responses that are not only too slow for fast moving threats but they also generate a huge volume of indicators that burden already overstretched security teams. Further, legacy EDR tools drive up the cost of security operations and can slow processes, negatively impacting business.
FortiEDR delivers advanced, real-time threat protection for endpoints both pre- and post-infection. It proactively reduces the attack surface, prevents malware infection, detects and defuses potential threats in real time, and can automate response and remediation procedures with customizable playbooks. FortiEDR helps organizations stop breaches in real-time automatically and efficiently, without overwhelming security teams with a slew of false alarms or disrupting business operations.
SentinelOne delivers autonomous endpoint protection through a single agent that successfully prevents, detects, responds, and hunts attacks across all major vectors. Designed for extreme ease of use, the S1 platform saves customers time by applying AI to automatically eliminate threats in real-time for both on-premise and cloud environments and is the only solution to provide full visibility across networks directly from the endpoint. To learn more visit www.sentinelone.com or follow us at @SentinelOne, on LinkedIn or Facebook.
Fortinet FortiEDR is ranked 9th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 5 reviews while SentinelOne is ranked 2nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 20 reviews. Fortinet FortiEDR is rated 7.8, while SentinelOne is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiEDR writes "Straightforward, easy to maintain, and works as per our expectations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SentinelOne writes "Made a tremendous difference in our ability to protect our endpoints and servers". Fortinet FortiEDR is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Sophos Intercept X and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response, whereas SentinelOne is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Carbon Black CB Defense, Darktrace and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Fortinet FortiEDR vs. SentinelOne 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.