Symantec Endpoint Security Reviews

We are using Symantec Security for the server and the client. For the server, we are using Symantec Data Center Security (DCS), and for the client, we are using Symantec Endpoint Security.

We work with all deployment models. We have cloud and on-premises deployments, and we also have hybrid deployments. The cloud provider varies based on the customer, but mostly, our customers have AWS and Azure.

We are using it on 1,600 computers. All the systems and servers are protected with the Symantec solution. Our environment has an uptime of 99.9% because we never had any attack or issue related to viruses. There is zero downtime.

It works very smoothly. There is no high utilization of the hardware.

EDR and ATP features are most valuable.

Its interface needs improvement. Its interface is very old, and it needs a new look. Other solutions, such as Sophos and BitDefender, have a better and more modern interface, whereas Symantec has had the same interface for a while. There has been no enhancement in the interface. They should update and provide a better interface in 2022 for a better user experience for their customers.

Currently, Symantec's EDR functionality is expensive, and it is an add-on, whereas other devices have built-in EDR functionality. It would be beneficial for customers if Symantec does the same.

Their support also needs to be improved.

I have been using this solution for 11 years.

It is average in terms of stability. It works fine, but when we do the upgrades, there are stability issues.

Its scalability is very good. We are able to scale up to 10,000 users, and it is working fine. There are no issues with it. 

We are working with government institutions and corporations in various industries. We are also working with educational institutes. It is being used in all sectors. 

We don't have any plans to increase its usage as of now.

We have been a Symantec partner for a long time. Since the Broadcom takeover, we have been facing many issues with support. In the last three years, we have not received proper support from them. We have had the worst experience with their support. They don’t understand the issue. I explain the problem, and after two or three days, they again come back asking for the log. I would rate them a five out of ten.

Neutral

We didn't use any other solution previously. We have been using only Symantec. It is the best solution for us and our customers.

I'm involved in its implementation from the start to the end, which includes project discussions, deployment, and handover. I work with my colleagues and provide guidance on what to perform, how to perform, and how to configure policies.

The deployment depends on the environment of a customer. Some customers have a small environment with 100 to 200 users. In such a case, the deployment is simple, and there’s no complexity. If a customer has 5,000 to 10,000 users, and they are working from different locations, requiring server configuration at different locations across the world, it gets complex. We have done successful implementation in complex as well as simple scenarios. 

The deployment duration varies based on the number of users. Usually, one to two days are enough. The number of people required for deployment also varies based on the customer environment.

We create a document for implementation, and when we are handling a large implementation with 5,000 users, we deploy the 100 or 200 from our side, and then we guide and train the customer's engineer who takes care of the remaining deployments.

For 5,000 users, 5 to 10 people are enough to handle the deployment and maintenance. They all have different roles. For example, one of them handles the policies, and one of them takes care of the implementation. Similarly, one of them works with the updates. They take care of all the functions.

We do evaluate other solutions when a customer asks for a comparison with another solution, such as Sophos. We then need to do a PoC in the customer environment.

I would strongly recommend this product. It is better than all other antivirus products. It is a brilliant product when it comes to functions or features. There is no doubt about its antivirus capability. It is far better than other products, but they need to focus on its UI.

Overall, it is a very good product. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

We were facing many problems related to AV definitions not being updated and viruses, and we could solve these problems with the help of Symantec. 

It is a good product. It has saved us from external attacks and viruses.

It is easy to use. Its interface is user-friendly. So, anybody can use it very well, which is a good thing.

It is a reliable product, and its performance is also good.

Automation of tasks should be improved on SEPM. It is currently manual, and we should be able to automate installation and deployment from the client side.

I have been using this solution for the last seven years.

Its stability is good. It is reliable.

Its scalability is good. We have more than 50,000 clients in our environment, and Symantec is installed on all the clients. It has been working properly, and it is easily able to detect viruses and malicious files. We currently don’t have any plans to increase its usage.

Their support is good. Every time we are facing an issue, their technical support team is able to help us. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

I didn’t use any other solution previously.

I wasn’t involved in its deployment. In terms of maintenance, it doesn't require any maintenance.

I would 100% recommend it. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

We provide support, services, and licenses to customers. Clients mainly use it for security features: antivirus, anti-spyware, host firewall, and the application development tool. Our clients are in enterprise industries as well as small finance companies.

The solution is deployed on-premises. I'm working with the 14.3 RU4 version.

The most useful features are the antivirus, anti-spyware, and firewall features. It also provides application control and Host Integrity, which is a very unique feature.

Symantec helps prevent attackers from stealing domain credentials and launching stealthy attacks.

Almost all threats are detected by Symantec, which is a very good feature. They also have Global Intelligence. It's a great detection technology.

We blocked indicators of compromise. We created multiple custom rules for that in the application control, which is helpful if it's a zero-day.

Symantec needs to develop some reporting features and notifications. For instance, if the server is not on or it's shut down. There should also be time-based USB control.

The APIs could also be more developed.

I've been using this solution for 12 years.

The product is very stable.

It's scalable. Our clients plan to increase usage.

Currently, the technical support is not very good. I would rate them four out of ten. Their response time is slow.

Initial setup is very easy. There's no complexity. It's simple compared to other products.

We deployed the solution through the remote deployment tool.

Our implementation strategy was to first implement the managers, test the solution, then deploy it.

Two or three people are needed for deployment: one person for administration, one for deployment, and one for reporting.

The amount of people needed for maintenance depends on the different policy creations. It mostly involves creating the policies for the threat actors, the indicators of compromise, and upgrades. It also depends on the size of the company.

I heard a lot about McAfee, and their reporting feature is very good compared to Symantec.

I would rate this solution nine out of ten.

Our primary use case of this product is endpoint security. We use it to secure our environment and endpoints—the basic purpose of antivirus products. 

This solution is deployed on-premises. 

One of the most valuable features is its antivirus database, which is current and updated daily. Another valuable feature is its capacity to be managed by a single server. The solution is managed by a secure server, so all the endpoints are managed from a central point. 

For me, Symantec has been working fine. I'm not dealing with security inside the company, I'm just in the network part, so I can't think of any suggestions for improvement. 

As for some features I would like to see, I'd like a retrospective action feature similar to Cisco Secure Endpoint's. Some antiviruses don't allow you to re-scan a product that was in the former scan—for example, if a file was classified as proper, but then for some reason the file was changed, we need an antivirus with retrospective capability. We need EPP and EDR products in a secured environment. 

We have been using this product for more than 10 years. 

This product is stable. We've been using it for 10 years, and I can say that it has been stable. 

Basically, once the product is installed on the server, there is no maintenance to do. Maybe there are some updates, moving from a lower to a higher version, but this is the main maintenance that people do. 

This product is easy to scale. Normally, such a product isn't easy to scale nor to manage, but this solution is user-friendly and isn't complicated to manage. In my company, this product is deployed on all the workstations—more than 1,700 PCs.

I'm not dealing with this product on the front line—it's managed by my colleagues on the security team—but I think Symantec's technical support is fine. If we ever have an issue, I think we raise a ticket to Symantec's support center, and they take care of us. 

Deploying Symantec is easy—when you install it, you click "next," "next," "next," and then you update the antivirus. When you start, it's already directly in production. For me, the initial setup was not a big deal. We deployed this solution internally. 

We implemented this solution through an in-house team. 

We are currently testing Cisco Secure Endpoint for endpoint protection, and we have been using it for one year. I prefer it because Cisco is one of the big network and security vendors, so when they sell a product, they're sure about the whole performance of the product. The product must have a good reputation because the brand itself says something. 

I rate Symantec End User Endpoint Security an eight out of ten, and would recommend it to others. 

We primarily use the solution to protect our endpoints. There are growing attacks worldwide, and we need to be protected against any eventuality - including malicious attacks or ransomware. We also use the solution to protect endpoints for users that work from home. 

The product is good at alerting users to anomalies.

The detection is pretty good.

The system has been working fine and is quite stable.

The device control has been working impeccably. 

The solution can scale.

We'd like to have a solution that offers a single pane of glass that would allow us to integrate all of our traffic and solutions under one umbrella so that we can look at all the incidents in one place. 

The product needs to be well versed in the security landscape to best protect us from malicious attacks, as we've seen a rise in activity.

The agent shouldn't use up so many resoures at the endpoint when scanning and protecting.

There needs to be better communication, back and forth, between on-site teams and off-site users. If something is happening off-site there should be some sort of logging or details that can be shared with the main office.

The solution needs to do a better job at scanning video links. 

There have been instances where we haven't been able to find the root causes of alerts.

The size of the footprint of the software is too high. It's quite heavy.

Network and cloud scanning coverage needs to be expanded and improved upon.

The functionality could be much better.

There also needs to be more training offers to companies to help understand the technology and its capabilities a bit better. 

Technical support is not great. They are not responsive. 

I've been using the solution for a long time. It's been more than ten years.

For the most part, the stability is okay. 

You can scale the solution very well. It's not an issue as well. However, the support is lacking, and it might deter users from wanting to scale. Even the resellers are warning clients that the support isn't there, and the company is not responding well to queries. 

We have found Symantec's technical support to be very sluggish. They are very slow to respond and alert us to changes. It's quite a problem. Trend Micro, for example, has much better service. Even if you look at Palo Alto, they really work with you and give you complete training. Symantec really doesn't offer its clients much.

We are using Trend Micro. Many customers seem to be moving over to them as they are losing faith in Symantec's support capabilities. 

The initial setup has given us some trouble in the past. We use a Windows server and have had downtime in terms of setting things up. 

They have increased the products of these products recently without any notice. This hasn't gone over well with small clients.

We are customers and end-users.

We use various versions of the solution, according to which Windows versions we are using.

What we would really like is a solution that could really put all of our security under one pane of glass, which Symantec doesn't really do at this time. 

Our concern is having a solution that can keep up with the shifting landscape, as malicious activity is on the rise. We need a solution that is holistic in nature and can help us work with our other in-house solutions and other products writ large.

Also, the company seems to not be very responsive to queries. The resellers are becoming more vocal on these concerns as well. For this reason, we are considering just switching it out altogether.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's a good solution for endpoint protection, however, we worry about the lack of support and response from the company.

We are using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for our network security solution to protect us against threats, such as malicious software and websites.

The solution is easy to manage.

The solution already has support for Windows, Mac, and Linux but it could improve by having better support for Linux. We have run into some problems when there are upgrades. If they can improve this point, Symantec would be good for endpoint protection as well as for a critical server.

I have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for approximately three years.

When we were not able to find a solution to issues we are having we have contacted technical support. There are times we created a support ticket in the morning and they respond in the evening when we are not available. However, they have been helpful and eventually provide us with a solution, it can take a bit of time.

The installation is not difficult for Windows and Mac OS it will autonomically install, based on the schedule we plan. However, for Linux, we could not do the installation from the Symantec manager and needed to install it one by one on the servers. 

One great benefit is we do not need to activate a license for every endpoint. The price is fair.

I have evaluated McAfee and Kaspersky.

Symantec was bought recently by Broadcom and this could be a reason some might not want to purchase the solution because of their background. However, this solution is popular and competitive with other solutions, such as McAfee or Kaspersky.

I rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security a seven out of ten.

We have Windows Endpoints and Linux Endpoints, but I believe it is mostly deployed on Windows. We do not have it installed on Linux.

We don't think the features are very valuable because they have limitations.

There are limitations because everyone these days has hybrid working; however, the endpoint does not work for us unless we are connected to a VPN, which is a major limitation. And because it's quite old technology that hasn't been updated, we don't want an on-premises solution; we want a cloud-based solution. We want a cloud-based solution and a market leader.

When I look at the Gartner Quadrant and the Magic Quadrant, it's nowhere near, if not lagging behind. For those reasons, I would not use it.

It was a good product many years ago, but since Broadcom took it over and so on, it has fallen behind.

I have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for over five years.

I don't recall the version, but we are not working with the most recent version.

It's an older version. We are not looking to carry on using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security. We want one of the market leaders, and Symantec is in no way near being the market leader.

It's stable, but this could be due to our surroundings. There is only enough storage to store it. And I believe it is due to us, rather than the product, that we only store a limited amount of data.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is scalable.

We have very few people in our company who use this solution because we currently outsource our security operations to Symantec. There will only be three or four people that will be working with this product.

It's used every day, at some point.

I have not personally contacted technical support, but my security team may have.

Broadcom is concentrating on its top 200 customers. I don't think my team is overly impressed with the support they have been getting.

The support needs improvement.

Previously, we had not used any other Endpoint protection products.

I don't remember the installation process because it's been five years since it was done.

I'm sure it will require some endpoint updates.

Because we are still awaiting pricing, I am not sure what the difference is. I have only done the technical comparison; I haven't done the pricing comparison yet.

We are looking at CrowdStrike and Microsoft Defender.

Because we're not in the Top 200 in Symantec, we don't get the traction and escalations, but more importantly, if I look at the market leaders, it's very much Microsoft or CrowdStrike, and Broadcom Symantec is nowhere near the leading endpoint security in Gartner.

We want one that is multi-platform so that we can receive consistent and comprehensive reporting and alerts across all platforms. We're looking for a SaaS-based solution, which means it's all cloud-based and has advanced threat protection, including machine learning for zero-day attacks, as well as the ability to detect vulnerabilities and misconfigurations in real-time. One that's able to do memory scanning for malicious code threat hunting.

I couldn't recommend this solution; instead, I'm going for the market leader, which, is CrowdStrike, followed by Microsoft.

Based on the experience of my colleagues, and not as much my own, I would rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security a six out of ten.

The application and device control are valuable features, and the live update is another one. We have a schedule to check every four hours for the live update.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Symantec End-point production doesn't support the EDR function.

There are certain drawbacks regarding deployment. We have to leverage other things like PPM.
Another major drawback is that we can't do the deployment from the console itself. We have to depend on other products technically.

The reporting is not as good.

Check detection could be improved as well.

I've been using it for three years.

The support from Broadcom has been good.

The initial setup was straightforward. I think it's automatically configured, so we didn't have to do anything.

If you only want the Endpoint Protection solution, you can go with Symantec End-User Endpoint Security. It is an awesome solution.

However, in the case of a large user base, and you also have to take care of the deployment etc., then I would not recommend this solution.

I would rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security at six on a scale from one to ten.