We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"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."
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."
"If somebody has been compromised, the question always is: How has it affected other devices in the network? Cisco AMP gives you a very neat view of that."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"It is a very stable program."
"The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"Ability to specify the level of protection on devices,"
"The product can scale if you need it to."
"The solution is scalable, we have 500 users using this solution."
"There is plenty of features that make the solution work very well."
"Endpoint Security is efficient and easy to use. It doesn't slow the performance of your personal computer."
"It's flexible, and Kaspersky Endpoint Security's performance is good. Also, the pricing is fine."
"We have over 1,000 users using the solution in our organization and the solution has been able to handle it."
"The main feature of this solution is it is easy to use."
"I have not received any complaints about the performance."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"Technical support is excellent."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"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."
"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."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications."
"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."
"The technical support is very slow."
"It slows down the system sometimes, and it has the occasional false positive where it deems something a virus when it isn't."
"We have zero-day detection of malware but it cannot detect other types of unknown intrusions."
"They're restricted to endpoint protection for now, I'd like to see some additional products."
"This product could be improved by integration with Linux. The one limitation this product has is that it's not compatible with and doesn't offer protection for Linux servers. It could also be easier to configure."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The solution could be more secure. It's an aspect the company needs to be mindful of."
"I would like to see integration to many different systems easier."
"I would like to see better-enhanced features, such as protection against ransomware and different types of malicious malware."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"I would like to see more local integration for the applications that we use."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"Intrusion detection and intervention seem to be falling behind the competition."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"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."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"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 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 are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"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."
"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."
"Kaspersky is priced well."
"Licensing costs are on a yearly basis."
"Its price is on par with other products. It might even be slightly cheaper. There are no additional costs."
"The solution requires a license and there are different license packages depending on the number of users you need."
"We have a yearly license, and the pricing is fine."
"We pay a yearly annual subscription for this product."
"The licensing cost can be about $1,300 per year."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"It is based on an annual subscription."
"Customers would need to purchase a license. If a customer purchases an MVISION Endpoint license, he may use that license to install ENS. It's a flexible license where you have the option to either use the McAfee security software or the Windows Defender managed by McAfee, which is MVISION Endpoint."
"MVISION is intended as an enterprise product and it is priced like one. This solution is within the price range of competitors at the enterprise level."
"Licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is mid-ranged and quite reasonable compared to other similar products."
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.
McAfee MVISION Endpoint delivers enhanced detection and correction capabilities to augment native Microsoft Windows security controls, which are always up to date. Machine learning, credential theft monitoring, and rollback remediation boost the basic security built into the Windows and effectively combat advanced, zero-day threats.
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 55 reviews while McAfee MVISION Endpoint is ranked 27th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 6 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while McAfee MVISION Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "A mature product offering good protection and very good features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee MVISION Endpoint writes "This recognized brand has been reliable in the past but seems to be losing ground to competition". 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, whereas McAfee MVISION Endpoint is most compared with McAfee Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Sophos Intercept X, Trend Micro Apex One and Check Point Harmony Endpoint. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. McAfee MVISION Endpoint 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.