We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and CylanceOPTICS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The stability is very good."
"This is stable and scalable."
"It is a very stable program."
"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."
"The product provides sandboxing options like file reputation and file analysis."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was very simple."
"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."
"Device Trajectory is one of the most valuable features. We're able to dig in and really understand how things came to be and where to focus our efforts."
"Cylance is not a signature-based protection solution and instead works proactively using AI and ML models to patrol for malicious behavior."
"CylanceOPTICS is pretty stable."
"I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. I would give it a close ten as possible because, like SentinelOne, I've seen incompatibility. Whereas Cylance, I've seen none."
"CylanceOPTICS is easy to use."
"The solution has a high level of trust in the industry."
"It's pretty unintrusive"
"It is a bit early in our evaluation process to give proper feedback, although so far, the overall feedback is good."
"The initial setup was fairly straightforward. To get a large health care organization sorted, we had to create exemptions because some of the scripts and some of the automations were broken."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution is not stable."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"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 technical support is very slow."
"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."
"In terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"They could improve the main dashboard to more clearly show me the things that I want to see. When I open the dashboard right now, I see a million things and they are not always the things that I need."
"On the firewall level, they were lagging a little bit behind, but they are running up again. I have full trust in the new 3000 series of firewalls where we would also be able to look more into the traffic that we're monitoring and get more security layers in our services. That would definitely be a big step."
"The tools are ineffective. It flags a lot of things. To give you an example, it detected Google Chrome and blocked the user's access to it. That it mistook for malicious, which turned out to be a false positive."
"The product's technical support is slow."
"The detection component is something that they have to work on."
"The technical support could be improved although it's probably better than you get with a lot of the other traditional antivirus solutions"
"One minor issue that somebody mentioned was that they didn't like their management console."
"Our customers would like to see more automation with respect to how threats are handled once they have been detected."
"The reporting is very weak and not very good at all."
"CylanceOPTICS could benefit from more granular control in the timeline-building process. Ideally, users would be able to drill deeper into the analysis rather than have the machine dictate the direction."
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 9th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews while CylanceOPTICS is ranked 33rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 10 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while CylanceOPTICS is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Single dashboard management, quick infrastructure threat detection, and high level support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CylanceOPTICS writes "Enables the isolation and inoculation of infected machines, offering a practical solution for dealing with threats and preventing their spread within the environment". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Cisco Umbrella, whereas CylanceOPTICS is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. CylanceOPTICS report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.