We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"It is a very stable program."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"The solution is scalable, we have 500 users using this solution."
"The antivirus feature is very, very good."
"Easy to deploy, easy to use, and has a good detection rate."
"The product can scale if you need it to."
"There is plenty of features that make the solution work very well."
"The solution is very easy to use. It's an extremely user-friendly product."
"The price per endpoint is excellent."
"I like that Kaspersky isn't heavy."
"The technical support is very slow."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."
"...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"I would like the solution to be able to allow to have end to end security services from the final user to the server."
"The company needs to keep developing more security measures to help keep its customers safe. If they could keep adding to security features, it would be ideal."
"I would like to see integration to many different systems easier."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security could have more visibility and threat hunting. Right now, if it detects a file, it's quarantined, and then we can't find more details other than the path and the file name. We don't see what process it's warning off and how the virus got in. So, the reporting on the quarantined items, why were they quarantined, etc., could be improved."
"The application updates and drive encryption are lacking."
"I would like to see enhancements made with respect to the administration."
"The stability could be better."
"The process for upgrades is very slow."
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it."
"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
"We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"There is a license required for this solution and we have 1,800 licenses. The cost is a bit high and we are looking for an alternative."
"This solution is priced lower than some of its competitors. The support from Kaspersky is purchased separately."
"We have an annual license and there is a fee per device used. The price is fair compared to the latest EDR solution."
"The solution requires a license and there are different license packages depending on the number of users you need."
"The licensing cost can be about $1,300 per year."
"We have a yearly license, and the pricing is fine."
"We pay a yearly annual subscription for this product."
"I find the solution to be inexpensive compared to other solution like Crowdstrike."
Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 14 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 54 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "We have gained more visibility into what's going on because it detects a lot of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "A mature product offering good protection and very good features". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne, Carbon Black CB Defense and Sophos Intercept X, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Sophos Intercept X, SentinelOne and Blackberry Protect. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) 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.