Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Reviews

I haven't experienced any problems.

They could improve the information about how they are dealing with people who could attack minors. This is my main concern. 

Another concern is ransomware, whether people can penetrate and encrypt my data or steal my credit card/banking information. 

I have been using it since 2019.

It performs well. The stability is seamless.

Scalability is not a problem because we don't have servers. We don't do anything more with the computers than use them for studies, reading papers and books, watching movies, and communicating with our family. So, we don't need to scale up.

If they could send me more information, then I could evaluate, read more, and give them opinions. For example, if someone tells me about a problem, then I can give solutions and also write to Microsoft regarding this information.

From the beginning of the pandemic, we received another kind of software when we had to be at home, but it caused us problems with the performance. So, I decided to quit the other software. Then, I installed Windows Defender on all my computers, including my grandchildren's computers.

I was using Sophos previously, but it was causing problems with the performance. For example, when my grandchildren were trying to assume a session, they opened Excel or Word with a 4 GB computer using Windows 10 and then they always lost the connection or the continuities because the computer slowed down. However, when we decided to quit using Sophos and install all the features of Windows Defender, then those problems were resolved.

The initial setup is very easy and straightforward.

My deployment process: I put some checks in the questions that they have. It was very easy. I read about it in the tutorial. I installed it on my entire family's computers (six computers) in less than half an hour.

It is free.

We are totally satisfied with performance and price. However, there is still the question, "Is it safe and secure enough for home, primary-school-age children, and minors?" Despite having a Masters degree in Computer Sciences and Mathematics, I have not been able to say if Microsoft is doing bad or good things.

Many companies may say that they have the best product, but I recommend always watching the news about what a company is doing. Stay informed. Don't be complacent. 

The solution is a nine out of 10.

The primary use of this solution is for the detection of malware and to stop phishing. 

One of the valuable features of the solution is the small updates that keep my machine relatively clean from any infections. Additionally, it has good integration with other Microsoft products.  

I would like the solution to be able to prevent unauthorized programs from installing and to block unauthorised URLs which is similar to web filtering product. 

I have used the solution for approximately two years. 

I find the solution to be stable. 

I find the solution to be quite easily extended into other environments. It is scalable, I have it on three devices. 

I have previously used the McAfee Stinger product. 

The installation of the solution is easy. I completed it myself and it took approximately 20 minutes. 

The solution comes as a part of Windows 10 and it is covered under its license. 

I will continue to use and would recommend the solution to others. 

I rate Microsoft Defender Antivirus an eight out of ten. 

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is used for securing endpoints from threats.

The performance of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been good.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by providing more user-friendly dashboards. They may be complicated for some.

In a future release, they should add a feature for patch management.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for one year.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been stable.

The scalability of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been good.

We have approximately five clients using the solution. We have thousands of licensees for this solution within my company.

The technical from Microsoft could be better. It is not as good as other solutions.

The implementation of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint because it is pre-installed with Microsoft Windows. Other solutions you have to install separately, such as Check Point.

The license for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is included in the license for the Microsoft Windows operating system.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a nine out of ten.

I use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint protection on my personal computer.

The solution has an easy-to-use interface, is always updated, and is user-friendly.

The solution could improve by providing more integration.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for approximately one year.

The solution is stable and secure.

I have found the scalability quite good.

The installation is simple.

I did the implementation of the solution.

The solution is free and comes with Windows.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a ten out of ten.

The solution is used to protect the endpoint. Also, there's an antivirus and then advanced threat protection. It's also detecting threats and sending that to the cloud and correlating that without the events from other parts of the EMS suites. That's primarily what we are using it for. It is also capable of doing some attack surface reduction that you can configure on the endpoint. It's basic protection plus surveillance. It's also an EDR, however, we are not using that.

It's always very difficult to measure, however, it integrates very well with the other Microsoft products. It's easy to handle them. That's an important point when you want to achieve a higher security level that it's easy to manage. You can be sure that it's up to date and it's managed and the alarms are taking care of and so on. It's not only the technical capabilities, that are important. How it plays together with the rest of your products is also key.

It's not really visible for the user - which is a benefit. 

We know it's pretty good in terms of detecting threats against our platform and attacks. We have seen that.

There's privileged escalation or lateral movements for attacks.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good.

The dashboards could be better. There's a suite of different products that play together and enhance security and receive signals from different parts of the product suites. When you are trying to look into that sort of depth on a dashboard, or across various dashboards, it can be difficult to obtain a comprehensive overview as it's so divided.

The initial setup can be a bit complex. 

Beyond that, I'm not involved in the day-to-day operation. There may be others that can offer more insights.

We started using it when we started to migrate to Windows 10 and that was likely four years ago. However, that was the Microsoft basic version. Recently, we also enabled the ATP path.

It's my understanding that the solution is very stable. It's a pretty mature solution.

In terms of scalability, we have not encountered any issues. We have around 7,000 end points.

We don't have too many physical people dealing with the solution. We have some people in operations and then some architects and so on, however, they are not involved on a day-to-day basis.

The initial setup is somewhat complex, however, that's not only due to the product. It's also the environment that it is going to be implemented into. Also, when you have a company with a lot of legacy products and all the setups and so on there may be difficulties in terms of getting everything to work together.

The deployment can take up to a couple of months, however, it's dependant on the environment that it needs to be implemented into. For instance, if other kinds of agents are writing on the computer, you need to make sure that it is not consuming too much CPU capacity and so on. If you have a good system, it would be very quick to install.

We have a deployment plan and we have taken advice from Microsoft Learning from their onboarding Planning information. There isn't anything that is very special, as, when you roll out new software on an endpoint, you must make sure that it's not disturbing the day-to-day operation. You start with a small group of test users and then do it in bigger and bigger waves and always be ready to go back. It's good to have that preparedness so that you can roll back and you can investigate what's gone wrong and so on, however that's not special to a different endpoint. That's a normal deployment strategy.

It has been possible to reduce the use of other agents. Beyond that, we have not made any financial calculations in relation to ROI. We have been using McAfee, for example, among others, and it's been possible to scale down. Microsoft is more integrated, more comprehensive, and Defender is part of the Microsoft operating system.

We are customers and end-users.

This Microsoft security platform is very much a SAS platform. It's playing together with all the other security products from Microsoft and the company is using the Azure platform to collect the information and to work on the main refine security findings. It's working very well together with the Microsoft Cloud solution for security.

It's my understanding that they call it the security graph. It's quite important that they are communicating together. Windows Defender, ATP is delivering a lot of telemetry to that form and correlating it with telemetries.

The reason why we have implemented DHCP part is due to the fact that we bought a Microsoft E5 license with a lot of security enhancements.

I've only seen it in the implementation and design phase, however, it's pretty good. That said, it's also within the environment of a large company where the processes can be a bit difficult.

I'd advise users to integrate it into their security operations center so that they can have the full benefit of the product.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

There are endpoints that are not in our organization's network but are connected directly to the web. We use Microsoft Defender for the antivirus.

We are not dealing with this solution daily, just when there is an issue from time to time.

The interface could be improved.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for a couple of years.

It's a stable solution.

We are only running it on a few workstations. The scalability is okay.

It's run on 10 out of 3,000 workstations and we plan to continue using it.

We have no more than 10 users in our organization.

We are also using Symantec. 

We have a few endpoints where we use Microsoft Defender because we cannot use the Symantec Sets.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy to install and t only took a couple of minutes.

There is no team for maintenance. If there is an issue, the security team helps to resolve it.

We completed the deployment and implementation ourselves.

We don't have an issue with the price. 

We have a bundle where the price includes all Microsoft products.

This is an area that I am not dealing with. I don't have all of the information.

It's pretty good.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution is really fast. I have never experienced any viruses since I've been using it.

I think the console can be better.

The end-user also cannot do some advanced actions on it. It's a little bit complicated for our end-user, so it needs to be simplified.

I think the solution is complicated. This one is one of the concerns that I like to talk about because some end-users do not know how to navigate through the console and how to work with them. I think this is not such a big deal, but I know that there will be other things that may be important to us like, how we can centrally manage users and reports are really important for us. For example, in Kaspersky, we had a problem where we couldn't detect the attacks that we had in some of our zones in our data center. I think if Microsoft Windows Defender can report these things, it's going to be great.

It's really stable. I've used a lot of products, like ESET and Kaspersky. None of them are comparable with this one. This one is much better.

To scale the solution, I think you need more licenses but I'm not sure. We have 100 to 1,000 users. We just use it for some end users, not for all the users. The users are mainly end-users and a few admins. We plan to increase users annually.

We used other solutions, like ESET and Kaspersky. We had to change at first due to user complaints, especially about Kaspersky, because it used a lot of the resources. So we switched to ESET but after some time we just switched to Windows Defender. 

The initial setup was really easy, a no brainer.

I installed the solution on my own.

I would recommend the solution because I can confidently tell everyone that this product is working very well and it's stable. You are always sure that they are able to deal with a virus or something else that may interrupt your work.

I would rate this solution nine out of 10.

We use this as our antivirus solution.

Within its class I think, it has a high and decent detection rate.

There were a few detections that are not picked up, and then Microsoft picks up on that and they update it. That's just a normal thing you go through based on every antivirus solution. You're always going to have viruses and signatures that are coming out.

So, I wouldn't say it's the perfect solution because if you're looking at next-generation behavioral based things, for example, if you're going to use ATP, that's when you can get more methods out of it. With Defender, if you pay more you can get the ATP component, which is sold separately by Microsoft.

We do have some challenges in the reporting aspect of it. 

There's a lot of manual effort involved to configure what we need.

There are also a few issues with policies.

Defender by itself is not a solution. Defender is basically a functionality.

We have some issues with reporting, but I think it's just the way we've integrated right now, again not using ATP. So, we just use STC MS management. Then it's limited in terms of reporting.

From an operator's perspective, I think there are some policy detection issues where you've got a detection for a signature but how it translates into the FCCM dashboard where it doesn't really categorize that particular model. It picks something up as bad but it's just unknown.

So, I think that's a known issue with this particular thing. Because it doesn't know what it is classified as it doesn't really do anything. For it to do something, the policy has to recognize the category of that number. It could be a trojan horse or whatever it is, but it doesn't really do that. It could be what they call an autonomous detection where the system categorizes it as not recognized and hence it blocks it, but it's not going to let you delete it instantly. Usually, you can say if it's detected you want to block it, that's the first step. The second step is to be able to delete the file or quarantine the file. But it doesn't recognize that, so it doesn't know what it needs to do. Instead, it just blocks it. It only blocks it because it doesn't recognize it as being Malware.

I would rate this product a six out of ten.