We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response and Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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."Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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"
"It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Kaspersky EDR is far superior to other products. It gives detailed information about malware, geolocation, and more. Also, the agent itself is very lightweight compared to other products. The packages and updates were quite small in size, just a few KBs."
"It is a stable solution...It is a very scalable solution."
"The product is integrated with endpoint protection. We don't have to implement a separate technology. It provides visibility over the endpoints."
"The tool's performance and prevention are amazing."
"We have a concept of working from home. Most endpoints are not in the domain. It is our first line of defense. While we had Kaspersky deployed, it gave good insight into the upcoming challenge or threat."
"Kaspersky offers more visible and comprehensive features compared to other products."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is its consolidated features."
"One of the good features is the provider's Faulting capability. If any of our systems detect malware, we can check the behavior of the malware by sending it to Kaspersky's sandbox environment. This helps us assess how destructive the malware is. After analyzing it, we can create use cases and protection measures based on that behavior. So, this is the best feature of Kaspersky."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"The user-friendliness of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is particularly impressive. Even with basic technical knowledge, users can easily navigate the system, make changes, and implement updates."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"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 haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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."
"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"
"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."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"I want to be able to use the product as a patch management tool for my endpoints since it is an area that is not working effectively for me."
"The main issue was compatibility with the cloud itself. The CPU usage immediately spiked, causing the machines to hang and sometimes even forcing server or computer restarts."
"Enhancing user-friendliness should be a priority."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response lacks configuration options."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response needs vast resources on the central node. Not all maintenance tasks are in the GUI, so we often use commands. The lack of documentation for these processes means we frequently reach out to support, open tickets, and run complex CLI commands. It's not the most straightforward process. It should also improve stability."
"There are certain shortcomings with the UI of the solution. The UI is not at all user-friendly."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is expensive. It should improve its stability."
"Kaspersky EDR could be improved by adding network detection capabilities to enhance convenience and security."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"It would be much more convenient if the migration tool could be installed directly on the customer's VMs, enabling a smoother migration process to the new infrastructure, with potential restrictions addressed accordingly."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"There are a few areas for improvement. We have encountered licensing issues on occasion, and sometimes updates don't apply properly."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 24th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 15 reviews while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is ranked 30th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 8.0, while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Provides the ability to send detected malware to Kaspersky's sandbox environment for behavioral analysis". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor Endpoint Secure writes "Provides a unified and multi-layer security solution". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Sangfor Endpoint Secure is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Open EDR, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Trend Micro Apex One. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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.
