We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"This is stable and scalable."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."
"It has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."
"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"The stability of this product is very good."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management."
"The tool's use cases are relevant to security."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"The solution is efficient."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"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"
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The support needs improvement."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
"The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others."
"The solution lacks real-time, on-demand antivirus."
"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 42nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "It provides a whole new level of visibility and integrates with most other vendors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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.