We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Digital Guardian vs FireEye Endpoint Security comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital Guardian vs. FireEye Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"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 solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features.""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 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.""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 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.""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 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."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros →

"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability.""The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."

More Digital Guardian Pros →

"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others.""It has a feature called Isolation. If a device is compromised, we can connect it to our SOC, and no one would be able to access it. This way we can limit the damage to the network while we are investigating.""FireEye Endpoint Security's scalability is awesome. I think it is one of the best on that front.""The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features.""It is easy to use, flexible, and stable. Because it is a cloud-based solution and it integrates all endpoints of the cloud, we can do an IOC-based search. It can search the entire enterprise and tell us the endpoints that are possibly compromised.""It's a stable solution with good performance."

More FireEye Endpoint Security Pros →

Cons
"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.""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.""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 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.""The GUI needs improvement, it's not good.""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."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons →

"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial.""There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."

More Digital Guardian Cons →

"Malware detection can be better. It doesn't have support and detection for the recent malware, but it has a compensatory control where it can do the behavior-based assessment and alert you when there is something malicious or unexpected. For example, when a certain user is executing the privilege command, which is not normal. These dynamic detections are good, and they compensate for malware detection.""We would like to solution to offer better security.""Most of these types of solutions including others, such as Carbon Black and FortiEDR, all have the same features. However, Carbon Black is the leader when it comes to being robust and user-friendly and this solution should improve in those areas to stay more competitive.""The Linux support is very poor. I use base detection. Currently, they are providing malware protection and logon track features in Windows and Mac. These features aren't available in Linux. It will be helpful to extend these capabilities to Linux. We would also like assets grouping and device lock protection features, which are included in their roadmap.""It has very good integrations. However, its integration with Palo Alto was not good, and they seem to be working on it at the backend. It is not very resource-hungry, but it can be even better in terms of resource utilization. It could be improved in terms of efficiency, memory sizing, and disk consumption by agents.""They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us.""The reports need more development. They need more details on the reports and more details taking the executive view into consideration."

More FireEye Endpoint Security Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
  • "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."
  • "In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
  • "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."
  • "The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
  • More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
    565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
    Top Answer: 
    Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
    Top Answer: 
    The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer: 
    The Crowdstrike Falcon program has a simple to use user interface, making it both an easy to use as well as an… more »
    Top Answer: 
    It is easy to use, flexible, and stable. Because it is a cloud-based solution and it integrates all endpoints of the… more »
    Top Answer: 
    If you compare your solution without the antivirus solution, and the price of the agent, it is a little bit expensive… more »
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Cisco AMP for Endpoints
    Learn More
    Overview

    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.

    Digital Guardian Endpoint Data Loss Prevention (DLP) protects sensitive data on all your endpoints. It protects intellectual property and personal information. An endpoint agent that captures and records all system, user and data events on or off the network. It has a granular control of all data movement that can be configured to automatically block, justify or encrypt sensitive data in or attached to email, files moved to removable drives, cloud storage, or web - malware and malware-free - before sensitive data is lost. It has a built-in advanced data classification that creates and modifies classification and usage policies through content inspection, context-awareness and user classification. It provides design policies with controls that won't block actions that comply with corporate policy so employees remain productive while the data stays safe.

    FireEye Endpoint Security is an integrated endpoint solution that detects, prevents and responds effectively to known malware and threats traditional anti-virus endpoint security products miss. It expands endpoint visibility and provides contextual frontline intelligence to help analysts automate protection, quickly determine the exact scope and level of any attack activity and adapt defenses as needed.

    Offer
    Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
    Learn more about Digital Guardian
    Learn more about FireEye Endpoint Security
    Sample Customers
    Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
    The Fifth Avenue Theatre, Jabil Circuit
    Tech Resources Limited, Globe Telecom, Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Government13%
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    University7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Comms Service Provider24%
    Computer Software Company23%
    Government7%
    Financial Services Firm5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company23%
    Comms Service Provider23%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company24%
    Comms Service Provider20%
    Government10%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business39%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise51%
    No Data Available
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business36%
    Large Enterprise64%
    Find out what your peers are saying about Digital Guardian vs. FireEye Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Digital Guardian is ranked 21st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 2 reviews while FireEye Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 5 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 5.0, while FireEye Endpoint Security is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great desktop recording, very scalable, and perfect for protecting IP on desktops". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FireEye Endpoint Security writes "Enables us to do IOC-based search across the enterprise and isolate compromised devices". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft BitLocker, whereas FireEye Endpoint Security is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Tanium. See our Digital Guardian vs. FireEye Endpoint Security 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.