We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Cisco Secure Endpoint Competitors and Alternatives

Get our free report covering Microsoft, CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, and other competitors of Cisco Secure Endpoint. Updated: November 2021.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Cisco Secure Endpoint competitors and alternatives

DM
Information Security & Privacy Manager at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
By using the Deep Visibility feature, we found some previously unknown persistent threats

Pros and Cons

  • "The Deep Visibility feature is the most useful part of the EDR platform. It gives us good insights into what is actually happening on the endpoints, e.g., when we have malicious or suspicious activity. We came from a legacy type AV previously, so we didn't have that level of visibility or understanding. For simplifying threat-hunting, it is extremely useful, where traditional techniques in threat hunting are quite laborious. We can put in indicators of compromise and it will sweep the environment for them, then they would give us a breakdown of what assets have been seen and where they have been seen, which is more of a forensics overview."
  • "The role-based access is in dire need of improvement. We actually discussed this on a roadmap call and were informed that it was coming, but then it was delayed. It limits the roles that you can have in the platform, and we require several custom roles. We work with a lot of third-parties whom we rely on for some of our IT services. Part of those are an external SOC function where they are over-provisioned in the solution because there isn't anything relevant for the level of work that they do."

What is our primary use case?

Our use cases are for client and server visibility in our enterprise and operational technology environments, as EPP and EDR solutions.

How has it helped my organization?

Traditionally, we have had an open policy on endpoints in terms of what has actually been installed. We don't really centrally manage the application. So, we have had a sort of dirty environment. Now that we have SentinelOne with its advanced capabilities, this has enabled us to detect and categorize unwanted applications. It has given us a good foothold into the area of inventory management on endpoints when it comes to our applications as well.

One of the main selling points of SentinelOne is its one-click, automatic remediation and rollback for restoring an endpoint. It is extremely effective. Everything is reduced, like cost and manpower, by having these capabilities available to us.

What is most valuable?

The Deep Visibility feature is the most useful part of the EDR platform. It gives us good insights into what is actually happening on the endpoints, e.g., when we have malicious or suspicious activity. We came from a legacy type AV previously, so we didn't have that level of visibility or understanding. For simplifying threat-hunting, it is extremely useful, where traditional techniques in threat hunting are quite laborious. We can put in indicators of compromise and it will sweep the environment for them, then they would give us a breakdown of what assets have been seen and where they have been seen, which is more of a forensics overview.

From a forensics point of view, we can see exactly what is going on with the endpoint when we have threats in progress. It also gives us the ability to react in real-time, if it has not been handled by the AI. We have set the policy to protect against unknown threats, but only alert on suspicious ones. 

The Behavioral AI feature is excellent. It is one of the reasons why we selected SentinelOne. We needed a solution that was quite autonomous in its approach to dealing with threats when presented, which it has handled very well. It has allowed us to put resources into other areas, so we don't need to have someone sitting in front of a bunch of screens looking at this information.

The Behavioral AI recognizes novel and fileless attacks, responding in real-time. We have been able to detect several attacks of this nature where our previous solution was completely blind to them. This has allowed us to close gaps in other areas of our environment that we weren't previously aware had some deficiencies.

The Storyline technology is part of our response matrix, where you can see when the threat was initially detected and what processes were touched, tempered, or modified during the course of the threat. The Storyline technology's ability to auto-correlate attack events and map them to MITRE ATT&CK tactics and technique is very effective. By getting that visibility on how the attack is progressing, we can get a good idea of the objective. When we have the reference back to the framework, that is good additional threat intelligence for us.

Storyline automatically assembles a PID tree for us. It gives us a good framing of the information from a visibility standpoint, so it is not all text-based. We can get a visualization of how the threat or suspicious activity manifested itself.

The abilities of Storyline have enabled our incident response to be a lot more agile. We are able to react with a lot greater speed because we have all the information front and center.

The solution’s distributed intelligence at the endpoint is extremely effective. We have a lot of guys who are road warriors. Having that intelligence on the network to make decisions autonomously is highly valuable for us.

What needs improvement?

The role-based access is in dire need of improvement. We actually discussed this on a roadmap call and were informed that it was coming, but then it was delayed. It limits the roles that you can have in the platform, and we require several custom roles. We work with a lot of third-parties whom we rely on for some of our IT services. Part of those are an external SOC function where they are over-provisioned in the solution because there isn't anything relevant for the level of work that they do.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have used it for around 10 to 11 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In the 11 months that we have had it, we have only had one problem. That was related back to a bug on the endpoint agent. So. it is very stable when I compare it to other platforms that I have used, like McAfee, Symantec, and Cylance.

Being a SaaS service, they take care of all the maintenance on the back-end. The only thing that we have to do is lifecycle the agents when there is a new version or fixes. So, it is very minimal.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is highly scalable. It is just a case of purchasing more licensing and deploying agents.

We have three global admins, myself included, with about 10 other administrators. Primarily, the way that we are structured is we have a client team and a server team. So, we have resources from each geographical region who have access to the solution to police their own environment on a geographical basis. So, we have three global admins, then everybody else just has a sort of SoC-based level functionality, which goes back to the custom role issue because this is too much access. 

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is very good. My only criticism is they are not very transparent when they are giving you a resolution to a problem. We have had several cases where we have had a problem that we have been given the fix for it. However, when we asked for background information on the actual problem, just to get some more clarity, it is very difficult to get that. I don't know if it's relative to protecting the information regarding the platform or a liability thing where they don't want to give out too much information. But, in my experience, most vendors when you have a problem, they are quite open in explaining what the cause of the issue was. I find SentinelOne is a bit more standoffish. We have gotten the information in the end, but it is not an easy process. 

When responding to fixing a problem, they are excellent. It is any of the background information that we are after (around a particular problem) that we find it difficult to get the right information.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were previously using Trend Micro Deep Security. The primary reason why we switched was that it is rubbish. It is a legacy-based AV. We had a lot of problems functionality-wise. It was missing a lot of things, e.g., no EDR, no NextGen capabilities, and it had interoperability problems with our Windows platform deployments. So, there was just this big, long list of historical problems.

We specifically selected SentinelOne for its rollback feature for ransomware. When we started looking into securing a new endpoint solution about 24 months ago, there was a big uptick in ransomware attacks in the territory where I am based. This was one of the leading criteria for selecting it.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is extremely straightforward. The nature of the platform has been very simplistic when it comes to configuring the structure for our assets and policies. Several other platforms that I have worked with are quite complex in their nature, taking a lot of time. We were up and running within a day on the initial part of our rollout. For the whole organization, it took us about 30 days to roll out completely in five different countries across roughly 20,000 endpoints. 

Behavioral AI works both with or without a network connection. We tested it several times during procurement. It can work autonomously from the network. One of our selection criteria was that we needed it to be autonomous because we have air gapped environments. Therefore, we can connect, install, or disconnect, knowing that we have an adequate level of protection. This mitigates certain risks from our organization. It also gives us good assurance that we have protection.

We had a loose implementation strategy. It was based on geography and the size of the business premises in each country. We started with our administration office, but most of our environment is operational technology, e.g., factories and manufacturing plants.

What about the implementation team?

We did the deployment ourselves, but we had representation from the vendor in the form of their security engineer (SE). We did the work, but he gave us input and advisories during the course of the deployment.

Three of us from the business and one person from Sentinel (their SE) were involved in the deployment of SentinelOne.

What was our ROI?

We saw a return of investment within the first month.

On several occasions, we found some persistent threats that we wouldn't have known were there by using the Deep Visibility feature.

The solution has reduced incident response time by easily 70 percent.

The solution has reduced mean time to repair by probably 40 to 50 percent. This has been a game changer for us.

Analyst productivity has increased by about 50 percent.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We are on a subscription model by choice. Therefore, we are paying a premium for the flexibility. We would have huge cost savings if we committed to a three-year buy-in. So, it's more expensive than the other solutions that we were looking at, but we have the flexibility of a subscription model. I think the pricing is fair. For example, if we had a three-year tie-in SentinelOne versus Cylance or one of the others, there is not that much difference in pricing. There might be a few euro or dollars here and there, but it's negligible.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated:

  • Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
  • Cisco AMP for Endpoints
  • CylancePROTECT
  • Apex One, which is Trend Micro's NextGen platform.

The main differentiator between SentinelOne has been ease of use, configuration, and performance. It outperformed every single one of the other solutions by a large margin in our testing. We had a standardized approach in tests, which was uniform across the platforms. Also, there is a lot of functionality built into SentinelOne, where other vendors offered the additional functionality as paid add-ons from their basic platforms.

During our evaluation process, SentinelOne detected quite a lot of things that other solutions missed, e.g., generic malware detection. We had a test bed of 15,000 samples, and about 150 were left for SentinelOne. What was left was actually mobile device malware, so Android and iOS specific, fileless attacks, and MITRE ATT&CKs. SentinelOne performed a lot stronger than others. Cylance came second to SentinelOne, even though they were 20 percent more effective in speed and detection. The gulf was so huge compared to other solutions.

SentinelOne's EDR is a lot more comprehensive than what is offered by Cylance. They are just two different beasts. SentinelOne is a lot more user-friendly with a lot less impactful on resources. While I saw a lot of statistics from Cylance about how light it is, in reality, I don't think it is as good as the marketing. What I saw from SentinelOne is the claims that they put on paper were backed up by the product. The overall package from SentinelOne was a lot more attractive in terms of manageability, usability, and feature set; it was just a more well-rounded package.

What other advice do I have?

Give SentinelOne a chance. Traditionally, a lot of companies look at the big brand vendors and SentinelOne is making quite a good name for itself. I have actually recommended them to several other companies where I have contacts. Several of those have picked up the solution to have a look at it.

You need to know your environment and make sure it is clean and controlled. If it's clean and you have control, then you will have no problems with this product. If your environment isn't hygienic, then you will run into issues. We have had some issues, but that's nothing to do with the product. We have never been really good at securing what is installed on the endpoint, so we get a lot of false positives. Give it a chance, as it's a good platform.

I would give the platform and company, with the support, a strong eight or nine out of 10.

Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
AT
Chief Security Officer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 20
Protects employees wherever they are and offers visibility into what machines need patching, but the deployment process needs improvement

Pros and Cons

  • "The OverWatch is the most valuable feature to me. It's a 24x7 monitoring service, and when they see anything suspicious in my environment, they will investigate."
  • "If we have a dashboard capability to uninstall agents, I think that would be great."

What is our primary use case?

We have several use cases including threat management, EDR, AV, and a SOC with 24x7 monitoring.

How has it helped my organization?

The fact that CrowdStrike is a cloud-native solution is very important. We don't have to deal with any upgrades on the appliances or console. The only thing we have to deal with is the upgrade of the agents. The SaaS model works very well for smaller companies like us.

The flexibility and always-on protection that is provided by a cloud-based solution are important to us. The cloud is everywhere. So, with the agent on the laptop, wherever the user may go, including home, office, or traveling, it's protected 24x7, all the time. That's what we require and this is what we got.

We haven't had cases where we have quarantined any material stuff yet, because we are relatively small and we don't see a lot of malware in our environment. In this regard, it has been relatively quiet.

In terms of its ability to prevent breaches, if you look at the cyber kill chain, the sooner you detect malicious activity, the better you are in responding as opposed to waiting for a data breach. I think CrowdStrike is capable of identifying malicious activity throughout the whole cyber kill chain. Step one is establishing when they have a foothold in the environment, and then detect whether they are moving laterally. The sooner they are discovered, the better we are at stopping data breaches.

CrowdStrike has definitely reduced our risk of data breaches. It reduces the risk of ransomware and it gives us comfort that someone is watching our back.

We had some end-of-life workstations that were running Windows 7 and for some reason, related to PCI compliance, CrowdStrike rejected them. This helped us in terms of maintaining our PCI compliance.

What is most valuable?

The OverWatch is the most valuable feature to me. It's a 24x7 monitoring service, and when they see anything suspicious in my environment, they will investigate. Essentially, they're an extension of my team and I like that. We're a small company and we only have a base of approximately 260 employees. As such, we cannot afford to hire skilled security people. So this makes sense for a smaller company like us.

There is a helpful feature to look into the vulnerability of the endpoint, which allows us to see which PCs have been patched and which ones have not. That helps my team to focus on those PCs that require their attention.

What needs improvement?

The deployment process is an area that needs to be improved. For some reason, CrowdStrike does not provide any help in terms of how to deploy the agent in a more efficient manner. They just don't provide the support there, which leaves their customers to figure out how to push agents out, either through GPO or through BigFix or through SCCM, and there was no support on that side. Not being able to complete the deployment in an efficient manner is one of the huge weaknesses.

It would be good if they had a feature to remove agents. We're in a transaction processing environment and if CrowdStrike is affecting a transaction processing server, we need to uninstall that agent pretty fast. Right now, the uninstall has to be done manually, which is not great. If we have a dashboard capability to uninstall agents, I think that would be great.

The dashboard seems a little bit too clunky in the sense that it's spread out in so many ways that if you don't log in on a daily basis, you're going to forget where things are. They can do a better job in organizing the dashboard.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using CrowdStrike Falcon for approximately five months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I haven't had any issues for five months since we've installed it, which is good to know. No users have complained about any CPU spikes or false positives, which we like.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

If you have a way to deploy agents in a rapid manner, I think the scalability is there. As we buy and acquire companies, we have to roll out agents to those places. Right now, it's still very manually intensive and it slows down the process a lot. So, I think the scalability can be improved with a rapid deployment feature.

Our strategy right now is just to install CrowdStrike for PCs and laptops. Once we get comfortable with the technology, we can start testing the servers. It's just that we haven't finished the deployment to PCs and workstations yet.

We have approximately 260 endpoints and we're probably about 20% complete in terms of deployment.

How are customer service and technical support?

We've raised support tickets such as the request for rapid deployment capabilities. However, we only received responses to the effect that they do not support anything like it. In that regard, the support has not been great.

That said, we don't use the support site a lot because we haven't had any issues with CrowdStrike. So, I can't say much about that.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Prior to CrowdStrike, we used Carbon Black Threat Hunter.

There is a huge difference between the two products. CrowdStrike is quiet. I think that Carbon Black Threat Hunter just locks everything that has to do with the endpoint. You generate a lot of noise, but it means nothing. Whereas CrowdStrike is more about real threats and we haven't seen much from it.

On the other hand, with Carbon Black Threat Hunter, we were able to deploy pretty fast and we could uninstall agents pretty quickly from the dashboard.

I had originally heard about CrowdStrike Falcon from my peers. A lot of CSOs that I have roundtable discussions with speak highly about it.

How was the initial setup?

The sensor deployment is a manual process right now, where we have to log into every workstation, every server, and install it manually. It's very time-consuming.

It's an ongoing process across our organization.

What about the implementation team?

One of our security engineers is in charge of deployment. However, we don't have someone on it full time. He works on this when he has time available, so we probably only have one-third of a person working on it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We completed a PoC using the trial version, and it was pretty easy to do. It took us less than an hour to deploy. It was just a matter of downloading a trial agent and setting it up.

Having the trial version was important because the easier the PoC is, the better the chances are of us buying the tool.

At approximately 40% more, Falcon is probably too expensive compared to Cisco AMP and Cylance, although that is because of the OverWatch feature. If you took out the OverWatch feature then they should be about the same. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fee.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated other products including Cisco AMP and Cylance. Neither of these products has the Overwatch feature that CrowdStrike has. The reason why we chose CrowdStrike was that we need to have 24x7 monitoring of our endpoints. That's the main difference.

In terms of ease of use, CrowdStrike is not so great. Cisco AMP has a better, cleaner dashboard and they're more mature in the way that you navigate. It's as though they have spent time getting customers to click on features and then figured out which is the quickest way to get to what you want, whereas CrowdStrike is not there in that sense.

Cylance is even better in terms of ease of use. They dumb it down to only a small number of menus and dashboards. There are probably only five dashboards that I look at on Cylance, whereas with CrowdStrike, I have to look at many.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anybody who is considering CrowdStrike is definitely to start with a PoC, and then definitely to subscribe to OverWatch. I think that OverWatch is the main benefit to it.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from CrowdStrike is about the different threats that are out there. They have a nice dashboard with information about threats, and you can read it and learn from it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate
CM
Network Designer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Easy to set up with excellent trend analytics and isolation feature

Pros and Cons

  • "The initial setup is pretty easy."
  • "In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the product as endpoint security which we have deployed on all servers and locations. This is not limited to the endpoint, however, as it has further integration with the firewalls and email solutions. Therefore, it can give us quick visibility in case there is any malicious or suspicious activity happening.

What is most valuable?

The solution offers a very high-performance. 

The solution has analytics that watch patterns and trends. If there is a change in user behavior or communication, it has the ability to track that. 

The solution has a very helpful isolation feature. If any system gets compromised, with one click I can access the system and isolate it from other networks, and then go into further forensic investigation of the current threat without compromising anything else.

There are a lot of lead solutions in this space, however, Palo Alto is number one.

The initial setup is pretty easy.

What needs improvement?

The solution should enhance the ADR and reporting. As of right now, they are giving reports, which are okay, however, there are other ways to get better reporting. That is an area where I already requested that Palo Alto work on.

In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations. 

They should extend the solution for URL filtering, as other endpoint security products are doing that already. Nowadays, users are working from home and therefore we have plenty of traffic back through the data center just for URL filtering security. If that functionality could be there in the endpoint, then we would be happy. It would ensure users working from home couldn't access malicious websites. 

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for one year. Before that, we were using Palo Alto Trap.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. I pretty much depend on product stability. Over the last six months, we have been able to see it's that Palo Alto is more stable than most. There is no such issue in that regard. 

This is a very stable product, whether it is running on a database or email system or on any platform. It works perfectly fine.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is very scalable. This is due to the fact that it is being managed through the cloud making it easy to deploy to a thousand endpoints. There is no issue at all. As long as there's enough space for the solution to expand, it can grow out to any size you need.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support from Palo Alto is perfect. However, we have first-level support from a third-party. They sometimes take time to respond, which is not ideal. That said, when we get aligned with the tech support from Palo Alto, that really works well. Their level one support is with other vendors, and level two and level three support is with Palo Alto. That's how they are set up. They deal with bigger issues.

Overall, we've been pretty satisfied with technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We're service providers. We offer a variety of solutions to our clients, including Palo Alto, Cisco, Microsoft, and McAfee, depending on their needs. We don't just use or recommend one particular endpoint protection product.

About a year back I implemented Cisco and Palo Alto for our customer. Cisco AMP is also a good solution while it is running with the grid, however, I have not been involved with using it for three years.

In routing and switching, Cisco is good. However, Cisco AMP, which is an endpoint security, requires you to work with many other AMP solutions from Cisco. 

My first preference would be Palo Alto and my second preference would be Cisco AMP.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not complex at all. It is very straightforward and very easy to implement. I implemented it for 1000 or so users, and it took only about one month to execute. Even when we were in a pandemic situation where users were at home, we did it that quickly. It is very easy to deploy.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is actually very reasonable. Palo Alto is very invested in some commercial endeavors and they have simplified their license. A team license can be used on-cloud, or on-prem. We have not faced segregation on any technologies, so a simple license gets any user anywhere without limitations. It is easy to increase the license as it's a cloud service. You just speak to your account manager and they can increase the licenses for you.

What other advice do I have?

While we deal with the cloud deployment model, we've also often used the on-premises deployment.

I'd advise other companies to use the solution. It really is the best one out there.

Overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. The reporting is a bit weak, and it's my understanding they are working on that. However, performance-wise and security-wise, this is the best product.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
NoufalMohamed
Technical Manager at Mignet Technologies
Reseller
Good device control, good features in the basic plan, and good price, but needs better performance and user-friendly dashboard

Pros and Cons

  • "Device control is most valuable. Symantec is providing all such features in the basic plan, whereas when we last checked, such a feature was not available in the basic plan of Malwarebytes."
  • "More control features can be added, and its performance can also be better. Sometimes, the performance is not good when we access the cloud console. Moving to each tab is slow. The dashboard can be a little bit user-friendly. For some users, it is a bit difficult. If someone is a little bit familiar with it, then it is fine. Otherwise, it is hard to find policies in Symantec."

What is our primary use case?

We are providing endpoint protection services. Our customers are very basic, and they usually enquire about endpoint protection, mainly antivirus. We try to explain to them about the threats and suggest that they go for endpoint security. We suggest this solution because it is a cloud-based solution, and they don't need to spare a VM for it. However, most of the time, they insist that nothing will happen to their system, and they just want to renew their endpoint protection system. They are usually not aware of ransomware or other threats.

How has it helped my organization?

I recently checked with a customer, and the feedback that we have got from this customer is that it is catching almost all pirated applications. They are very happy with it. The customer was using a few pirated applications, and it blocked all those applications. The IT person was able to convince them to go for genuine applications.

What is most valuable?

Device control is most valuable. Symantec is providing all such features in the basic plan, whereas when we last checked, such a feature was not available in the basic plan of Malwarebytes. 

What needs improvement?

More control features can be added, and its performance can also be better. Sometimes, the performance is not good when we access the cloud console. Moving to each tab is slow. 

The dashboard can be a little bit user-friendly. For some users, it is a bit difficult. If someone is a little bit familiar with it, then it is fine. Otherwise, it is hard to find policies in Symantec.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for just one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable.

How are customer service and technical support?

Initially, our customer had a problem with SSO, and they contacted Symantec's technical support. They got immediate support, but the support that they received was not good.

How was the initial setup?

Initially, it was a bit complex, and we spent some time understanding it. Since then, it has been straightforward. We know where exactly everything is. We have become familiar with it.

What about the implementation team?

We usually set it up for our customers.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is cheap. It is especially cheaper than Malwarebytes, which is three times higher than this. It is also cheaper than Cisco. Its price is almost similar to Bitdefender, Gravity, and CloudZone. 

What other advice do I have?

Before recommending a solution, we check out the new features in each solution because we provide constant support. I would recommend this solution if a customer's requirements are basic. Similarly, if you are concerned about the price and looking for a safer option to secure your endpoints, you can go with Symantec.

It lacks certain features that are there in other solutions. There are certain features that are available in Bitdefender, but they are not there in this solution. I'm also not sure how good is its anti-ransomware protection.

I would rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security a seven out of ten. As compared to other solutions, I don't find it to be a great solution, but our customers are very satisfied with it, and they would rate it at least an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
Flag as inappropriate
Rajesh-Singh
CEO & MD at Gurjartech
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
A good solution with good stability and good price

Pros and Cons

  • "It is stable and has a good price. I find it very good."
  • "They need to focus on their SLA or technical support. They also need to focus on their UI. They should also improve their content filtering tool and update it so that correct categories are there. Sometimes, when I want to block an online gaming website, it is not shown under the correct category. It is shown under another category. They need to review their content filtering tool on a bi-weekly or monthly basis and update the sites and categories. This will be really helpful for them."

What is our primary use case?

My client is a BPO with three branches. One branch is in the US, and two branches are in India. We are using Sophos for the best connectivity. We are using Sophos for endpoint, DLP, and encryption. We are also using it for content filtering and managing security policies. Currently, we are using its latest version.

What is most valuable?

It is stable and has a good price. I find it very good.

What needs improvement?

They need to focus on their SLA or technical support. They also need to focus on their UI.

They should also improve their content filtering tool and update it so that correct categories are there. Sometimes, when I want to block an online gaming website, it is not shown under the correct category. It is shown under another category. They need to review their content filtering tool on a bi-weekly or monthly basis and update the sites and categories. This will be really helpful for them.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for two to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I am happy with its stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I have not scaled it. Currently, I have only one client who is using it.

How are customer service and technical support?

They need to work on their SLA or technical support. Their technical support is not as good as Cisco's support. 

They get back in one or two hours, which is not good enough for a security or firewall solution. This is because an organization's security and all the outgoing and incoming traffic depends on the firewall. When they take one hour and two hours to provide the support, an organization is in danger during that whole duration. There are many threats on the internet, and they need only five minutes to hack.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We also work with Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Check Point solutions. If a client has Check Point, we work with that. Similarly, if a client has Sophos, we work with Sophos. We have knowledge of different end products. As compared to Cisco ASA, Sophos is good. However, Palo Alto and Check Point are better than Sophos.

How was the initial setup?

If you have more than five years of experience in network security or network administration, it is easy, but if you are a fresher, it is very difficult.

In terms of duration, it takes two days for it to be completely functional in production. Just connecting it doesn't take more than three to four hours.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Price-wise, it is good. Currently, we have a three-year plan.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend this solution. I find it very good. If you have an experienced engineer with more than five years of experience, you can easily maintain a Sophos solution. An experienced engineer would not require any support and will be capable of handling it. However, if you have someone with two or three years of experience, it will be difficult to handle all the features.

I would rate Sophos Intercept X an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Get our free report covering Microsoft, CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, and other competitors of Cisco Secure Endpoint. Updated: November 2021.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.