"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."
"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 solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"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."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"I like its reporting."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"Some of the valuable features I have found are the online documentation of the solution is well organized and thorough. I like the simplicity of bypass and the visualization of the active components."
"It is a very complete platform."
"What I like the most about it is the dynamic grouping, where you get to group endpoints based on setup criteria. That's pretty cool. I like the simplified policy management and simplified white-listing process."
"The visibility provided has been great."
"It has intelligent learning behind it and we have been very successful in preventing attacks."
"I like the historical features, interface, and integration."
"Performance is very good."
"Virtual Batching and the intelligent anti-malware components are valuable security tools."
"Allows us to protect OneDrive and SharePoint, and emails too."
"Able to quarantine any malware."
"The most valuable feature is Data Loss Prevention (DLP)."
"It can be managed from the cloud."
"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 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."
"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."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"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."
"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."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"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 GUI and reporting should be addressed and the product's administration features need fine tuning."
"I would like to see improvements made so that we can better see all of the processes."
"As far as I know, Carbon Defense has nothing that can be installed on mobile devices. It lacks a defense solution for mobile devices, especially mobile tablets. I would like to see support for mobile devices and the pricing should be less than the pricing for a normal workstation."
"The pricing could be more reasonable."
"The EDR portion could be better. I'm not a big fan, but it works."
"The solution needs better overall compatibility with other products."
"The application control can be improved. It should also have an automatic update of the agents."
"It could be a bit complicated. You have to be very familiar with Carbon Black to understand what it is doing and why it is doing. I would like to have more explanations and simplification in the user interface. It would be good to get help and see more explanations. It should tell us that a software is blocked and the reason for it. It would be good to be able to build chains in terms of what caused what, what worked, and what caused an issue. We are now moving from Carbon Black to Cortex XDR. While choosing antivirus software, we were also looking at Carbon Black because it also has an antivirus package, and it is next-generation, but we were told that Carbon Black doesn't support firewalls. We have Palo Alto firewalls. We would have chosen this solution if it supported firewalls, in particular next-generation firewalls, but unfortunately, it doesn't. Therefore, we decided on Cortex XDR because it integrates with Palo Alto firewalls."
"The cost is very high and it should be lower to be more competitive."
"Lacking analytics and a machine learning technique."
"One thing I have been facing is that some fake threats have appeared that even Trend Micro was not able to clear up. It couldn't tell you why these threats are happening, where they are coming from and what the costs are."
"Could include additional features such as an intrusion prevention system."
"I would like to see SMS notifications sent as alerts, in case we do not have access to our email."
"No built-in vulnerability scanner for management solutions."
Carbon Black CB Defense is ranked 9th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 24 reviews while Trend Micro ServerProtect is ranked 25th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 6 reviews. Carbon Black CB Defense is rated 7.8, while Trend Micro ServerProtect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Carbon Black CB Defense writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro ServerProtect writes "Realtime intelligent end-to-end detection and protection from malware in a highly versatile product". Carbon Black CB Defense is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Carbon Black CB Response and Sophos Intercept X, whereas Trend Micro ServerProtect is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Apex One, SentinelOne, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and McAfee Endpoint Security. See our Carbon Black CB Defense vs. Trend Micro ServerProtect 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.
