Symantec Endpoint Encryption Reviews

My use case is to protect my assets and information, and to have visibility over user activity.

The initial setup was easy. 

The UI could be improved.

I've been using this solution for six months. 

It's a stable product but I have to search for anything I need.

The technical support could be improved, it took a long time to get tickets resolved. 

Negative

The initial setup was easy but we had an issue with the product. We used a consultant for implementation and deployment took around two months. The senior system engineer and the managing director used this solution.

We paid an annual license fee. 

We had approximately 600 users but we migrated to a different solution because of some issues. I can't recommend this product. 

I rate this solution six out of 10. 

This solution is used predominately for data protection. We want to protect our data in case it is lost, or if we are replacing or upgrading hardware.

The most valuable feature is that it works in the background so that the end-users are not aware of what is happening on the laptop.

I do not find the environment to be very user-friendly.

The technical support is not very good, especially for issues involving the encryption.

If the user loses their encryption key then the process for recovering it is complicated and should be made simpler.

During the last upgrade, I experienced some data corruption on my laptop. I was unable to view the data, nor get support from Symantec.

I have been using Symantec Endpoint Encryption for about ten years.

I would rate the stability as good. We use this solution on an occasional basis.

With respect to scalability, we have had some hardware compatibility issues.

We have more than 1,000 users.

My team is in regular contact with technical support, although I have had no direct involvement with them. I do not find them to be very good.

The initial setup is of medium difficulty. It is neither simple nor complex.

The cost of this solution is a little on the higher side.

After implementing Symantec Endpoint Encryption we have been exploring alternate vendors to look at additional features like application protection. One of these solutions is the native Windows 10 BitLocker, and I am also evaluating a product by Dell.

I do not recommend Symantec Endpoint Encryption. The support needs to be improved.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We use the solution for endpoint protection. It can help us protect our information.

The product is stable.

It's a scalable enough product.

The solution is easy to use. We use it quite a lot - and not just Endpoint Encryption - we use a lot of their solutions.

The installation process is pretty straightforward.

The only challenge which I see is that they are no longer the major market player. They have too high of a price tag. That's why they're losing the market share.

Technical support needs to be better. They need more skilled techs and they need to be faster at responding. 

We've been using the solution since 2003.

The stability of the product is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We have three or four clients on the solution currently. 

We have 40,000 Symantec endpoints in all of our banks.

Previously, once the ticket is open and assigned, it was very good. However, now, based on the transition to Symantec, there's a lapse that brings a bad name to the product. It's not as good as it used to be. They likely use some market share between the bad customer service and the high pricing.

In Pakistan, they do not handle the troubleshooting directly. It's contracted out. If you do finally reach a proper engineer from Broadcom, they tend to know what they are doing and can help. However, it takes a long time to get a proper engineer.

The installation is pretty straightforward, especially for an engineer. It's a process that just flows. It's pretty easy whether it's deployed on-premises or in the cloud. 

The licensing is pretty high. They need to fix it so that they are more competitive.

The customer needs to pay the cost of the license on a yearly basis. 

In terms of encryption, we do deployments in the region on behalf of Symantec. We have Symantec DLP for almost 20,000 plus users. We have the messaging gateway from Symantec and we have SSL certification and issue verification from Symantec. We also have Blue Coat from Symantec, which we keep selling to our clients.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for endpoint Security for the Government of the Ministries that we are employed in.

Their cloud features such as Cloud Endpoint security, ransomware modules, malware, and other modules are very effective.

The main concentration has been on upgrading the cloud version with new features and cloud security. 

They are mostly providing the cloud version and stopping with the on-premises version. I think that they should improve the on-premises version to include the manageability and simplicity that is available on the cloud. This should all be included in the on-premises version.

Currently, the on-premises version is tricky and difficult. 

They should be looking at the on-premises deployment and simplifying it.

In the next release, I would like to see the uninstall feature be more advanced.

This is a stable solution. It is more stable than most solutions.

Even with other solutions, the PC slows down. All those things are there, but it needs to be worked out on a combination. The Endpoint security system always slows down the PC. For the most part, it has been good.

I can't comment on the scalability because I have not deployed on more than one thousand endpoints per customer.

We have five to six customers with each having six to seven hundred endpoints. Our customers' IT supporters have outsourced us.

The technical support is good. When you submit a tag, the support you receive is very good.

Previously were using Trend Micro Endpoint. We chose Symantec Endpoint because it is better.

Compared to cloud the initial setup is complex.

The cloud version is easy to set up. It's one gateway and you connect it and it's pretty much a configured service on the cloud.

Generally, the deployment takes a month for seven hundred endpoints per customer. This includes installing endpoints for customers.

To frame the policy and set up on-premises, it's approximately a week.

The cloud implementation is straightforward. We were able to implement it ourselves, but for the on-premises version, we needed support.

I would recommend cloud implementation, rather than on-premises if it is possible.

The on-premises deployment model will lead you to have errors.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use case is just endpoint protection. It is the basis of our whole infrastructure for security staff.

It ensures that we are kept on the same page of the latest version, as updates are being rolled out.

We can automate the solution. It is very simple, and we can handle remote people very easily.

The management console: Being able to quickly control who sees what, ensures we are on the latest version, and up-to-date.

We now have visibility on our metrics.

I would like them to have integration with a wider range of non-Symantec products.

It is the industry standard product with the common set of features, but we would like extra features added on.

It is pretty stable.

We are a small company. We have had no issues with the scalability nor do we anticipate issues as we grow.

The product works best with large companies, but if you will be opening multiple branches (scaling up), the product may be a fit for you.

The technical support is very good and responsive.

I don't know what they had before because I am new to this role.

At first, the initial setup was a little complex. Once I understood what I needed to do, it became straightforward. So, initially, there was a bit of a learning curve. For example, I needed to understand that I wasn't overpaying for the number of seats that we needed based on how we expected to scale up for that number of employees that we had.

We upgraded to the latest version within the last six months.

It can be expensive. However, if you plan to scale or are at a large enterprise company, this product could be what you need.

I used to work at Symantec, so the team chose the solution based on that. There wasn't a rigorous evaluation process. Though, I am sure that we also looked at Palo Alto Networks.

Give it a serious look.

Our security team is more on the immature side rather than the mature side, as we build thing out. This automated solution puts us at the base level where we can get better. We went from not being happy with what we had to this product.

The primary use case is to protect from data loss prevention in my company.

It has reduced the number of incidents related to the loss of information.

The precision that it has to identify all my assets.

I would like them to improve their support.

The stability is really good and nice. We don't have any issues with the stability, in particular. 

You can get any size or use it in any size organization. So, scalability is not a problem.

It's a bit difficult to get good support. Their response times are really bad. I don't like it.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was fast, easy, and not intrusive on my company.

Symantec did the deployment.

This solution has helped to increase staff productivity.

The licensing costs yearly are $5000.

We had three vendors on our shortlist. I choose this vendor because it was a leader at that time, and it still is the leader right now. 

I am happy with it and not looking to change vendors.

Try to look at many vendors. There are a lot of papers about solutions, especially this one. So, it's really nice. 

I started my security program four years ago, and we now have a mature security program. We added this solution as the last part of our security program.

It is good for encryption and USB devices.

The systems are quite integrated.

The problem with Symantec is that we have solutions that overlap. So sometimes we don't know which solution to use.

We have been using this solution for about five years.

it is quite stable. 

Scalability isn't applicable here because it is an endpoint encryption tool. We have about 200 people using the solution. Our usage will increase if we get new employees.

We used McAfee Disk Encryption in the past.

It was hard to install and took us about three months. The installation was outsourced.

It has annual licensing.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten, and I recommend doing a POC before implementing it.

The encryption feature is very good.

As we're just in the testing phase, we haven't explored many other features in-depth yet.

When we started at that time, the engineers configured the solution only for our roaming users. Now, we have to reconfigure to SQL because we have almost 10,000 clients. We have to do this through SQL because we cannot keep a record of each client.

The agent can be improved on the solution. Right now, we have an Endpoint Protection agent as well as an encryption agent and another for the DLVs and other services. We would prefer a single agent for the entire product.

Endpoint Encryption should be the same as Endpoint Protection. However, for security purposes, we don't want to show to the client the hard drive encryption and all of those related features. If the solution could remove this visibility on the client level and keep it on the control level of the server, that would be better. We don't want to show to the user the security policies.

We haven't had any issues with the stability of the solution.

The scalability of the solution is fine.

We haven't had any issues with the solution yet, so we've never had to contact technical support.

The initial setup is not complex. It's very easy. Deployment time depends on the client and on the machine. Some machines take 24 hours, some machines take three days. Some machines even take up to a half-day. It depends on the hardware.

We had assistance with the integration.

We're using the on-premises deployment model.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.