We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Cisco Secure Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is commended for its extensive cross-platform protection, user-friendly interface, and compatibility with third-party software. Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for its threat-hunting capabilities, sandboxing, and swift response to attacks. Users also praised the solution's seamless integration with Talos for continuous protection. Kaspersky users requested improvements in security and stability. They also want better documentation, faster malware scanning, enhanced encryption, and improved remote management. Cisco Secure Endpoint could benefit from providing more scenario-based information and a simpler, more customizable main dashboard. Integration with artificial intelligence and IoT is another area for improvement.
Service and Support: Users say that Kaspersky’s support is helpful and responsive, whether it comes from resellers, partners, or the vendor. Users said Cisco support is efficient and responsive, and customers also found it easy to find answers in the documentation without help. Some users recommend enhancing training programs and streamlining management consoles to further enhance the level of support provided.
Ease of Deployment: Some reported that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is straightforward to set up, while others find it more complex and time-consuming. Users generally found Cisco Secure Endpoint easy to set up, but some users reported challenges related to agent behavior and configuration. The initial installation involves downloading an agent and installing it on endpoints, and the total deployment time ranged from a week to several months.
Pricing: Users gave mixed feedback on the price of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. Some found it reasonable while others thought it was expensive. Cisco Secure Endpoint's pricing is seen as fair and reasonable. Some users requested additional discounts, particularly for educational purposes.
ROI: Our reviewers said that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business has proven to be a solid investment. Cisco Secure Endpoint offers cost savings and the potential to earn money by extending services.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business over Cisco Secure Endpoint. Kaspersky provides extensive protection across various platforms and systems, offering features like web filtering, email filtering, and anomaly control. Users find it simple to deploy and use, with high detection rates and minimal impact on system resources. Cisco Secure Endpoint requires improvements in customization and integration.
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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 threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"The stability of the solution is perfect. I believe it's the most stable solution on the market right now."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"Secure Endpoint has decreased our time to remediate by providing the tools and the integrations we need so we can quickly look across our entire network, look for those threats, and actually make good decisions."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"Kaspersky protects our company from ransomware attacks. We have multiple sites across the country, including the principal headquarters and different towns. We can see any viruses that are in the network and take action."
"It has a very good firewall, which lets you isolate your devices depending on the groups."
"The most valuable features for us include data security, as well as web browsing and password management security measures."
"It is very efficient. I like its simplicity."
"The initial setup was extremely straightforward and very easy."
"As far as it functions, it works fine."
"Setting up Kaspersky is easy, but it requires two or three core members from our team, including admins and managers if necessary. And that is because of the administration that I mentioned."
"The solution has been quite stable. The performance is good."
"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."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Detections could be improved."
"The integration of the Cisco products for security could be better in the sense that not everything is integrated, and they aren't working together. In addition, not all products are multi-tenant, so you can't separate different customer environments from each other, which makes it a little bit hard for a managed service provider to deliver services to the customers."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"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."
"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."
"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 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 them to add whatever makes filtering more advanced in scanning and blocking for malware in emails."
"They can improve the zero-day exploit to be more effective."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business needs an easier mechanism for updates."
"It would be better if it were more secure and stable. I would also like to see more powerful features in the next release."
"I would like to see better reporting."
"Kaspersky could be improved by better malware protection. They have to take advantage of Malwarebytes and integrate the same engine inside Kaspersky. I use Malwarebytes as well because Kaspersky doesn't always detect malware."
"he next thing that I would like to see in this solution are DLP features."
"Kaspersky and most other security products have a lot of modules. They recently added several new ones. You find yourself buying and deploying so many things. There are some modules that everyone uses, like, for example, the orchestration module. Instead of selling them separately, it would be better to have bundles or an all-in-one license."
"It's does not have the architecture or structure to scale up."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 43 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 110 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0. 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (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.