Kaspersky Endpoint Security vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps

As of June 2019, Kaspersky Endpoint Security is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 19 reviews vs Palo Alto Networks Traps which is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 9 reviews. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security writes "Enables us to reduce costs and offers manufacturing control". The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". Kaspersky Endpoint Security is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP), ESET Endpoint Security and Microsoft Windows Defender. Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP), Microsoft Windows Defender and Cylance. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Endpoint Security vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: June 2019.
346,318 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The advice I would give someone implementing this solution is that the management of the solution is very easy. You don't need a lot of people to manage the solution.The signature update is done securely.We used to have a lot of phishing attacks and all these kind of things for end-users so we decided that we needed endpoint security. We evaluated some solutions and found that Kaspersky is the most appropriate in terms of endpoint security and the speed of the user machine. The encryption is a major factor from our end.It helps to improve our security for our mobile and VMware infrastructure. The remote tasks are great.The blocking feature is the most valuable feature.The centralized management is a nice features. It gives us the leeway to deal with other things as protection is being carried on in the background. We do not have to keep on watching as long as we have the right updates. It also saves us time.It performs quite well as a firewall protection provider.We have gained advanced threat protection without investing more into that area.

Read more »

The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service.It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application.The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical.After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent.Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about.If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies.The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind.We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for.

Read more »

Cons
This solution needs improvement in the reporting section. Reporting in Kaspersky Endpoint is good but it's not that great. The platform needs to centralize reporting control.There have been some performance issues. They provide good security, but this slows down the performance of machines' servers. The software is not updating as frequently as we need.There should be some AI involved. We already have machine learning involved in recent releases but machine learning should be more enhanced in the upcoming versions.The reports aren't so good. To make it a perfect ten they should improve the reports and web interface.It needs more computer resources. They should have more anti-spam features.If someone has the older version of the solution, and wants to install a newer version, they must remove all of the previous applications. Otherwise, there will be issues with the solution.I would like to see better reporting.It's does not have the architecture or structure to scale up.

Read more »

It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously.Managing the product should be easier.There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly.There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results.Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere.Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis.They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else.There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It's a little more expensive compared to other competitors like Symantec.The licensing is fine, and it is well within reasonable rates.It is a cost-effective product.I received a very good deal with Kaspersky.It is a cost-effective endpoint security service.It is quite standard, because we use the volume licensing.The licensing is based per agent. You can get discounts if you have more agents.Pricing is very competitive and licensing is very much ethical.

Read more »

The price was fine.When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward.I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require.It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses.The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase.It is "expensive" and flexible.Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance.We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
346,318 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
16,098
Comparisons
11,078
Reviews
18
Average Words per Review
298
Avg. Rating
7.9
Views
19,749
Comparisons
13,265
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
854
Avg. Rating
8.7
Top Comparisons
Compared 9% of the time.
Also Known As
Kaspersky Work Space SecurityCyvera
Learn
Kaspersky Lab
Palo Alto Networks
Overview
Kaspersky Endpoint Security is a multi-layered endpoint protection platform, based on true cybersecurity technologies. This tightly integrated solution combines fully scalable protection capabilities for physical, virtual and cloud-based endpoints including desktops, servers, mobile devices and embedded systems. Every endpoint can be managed through one unified console, giving you a complete security overview, no matter how extensive your infrastructure. Kaspersky Endpoint Security delivers a reliable, enterprise-ready security platform, providing data to automatically enrich your SOC. Endpoint vulnerabilities and protection are managed together through one console, improving efficiency and reducing your TCO. It protects you from ransomware, exploits and even the most advanced forms of cyberthreats. It has Easy and effective centralized web, device and application controls reduce your attack surface and help keep users safe. And FIPS 140.2 certified full disk encryption helps fully protect confidential data on stationary and mobile devices.

Traps replaces legacy antivirus and secures endpoints with a multi-method prevention approach that blocks malware and exploits, both known and unknown, before they compromise endpoints such as laptops, desktops and servers.

Offer
Learn more about Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sample Customers
ACMS, Arqiva, Pakistan International Airlines, RAO UESCBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm30%
Construction Company20%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
Security Firm10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm42%
Insurance Company20%
Retailer8%
Non Profit6%
REVIEWERS
Government14%
Financial Services Firm14%
Retailer14%
Mining And Metals Company14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm16%
Comms Service Provider13%
Legal Firm13%
Media Company11%
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Endpoint Security vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: June 2019.
346,318 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business 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.

Sign Up with Email