We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Fortinet FortiSandbox based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"It has been scalable."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox is scalable."
"The solution extracts an attached file before reaching the user and notifies the user if there's something malicious in the attachment received along with an email."
"The most valuable features for me when it comes to Fortinet FortiSandbox are the integrity of the Sandbox and the power of the analyzing tool of the solution."
"The main benefit of Fortinet FortiSandbox is that it allows organizations to detect and prevent unknown threats from entering an infrastructure."
"You have access to a report as to what behaviors the example file entered in the registry."
"The solution is very good because it catches a lot of threats in emails."
"Integration is one of the solution's most valuable aspects. You can integrate even third-party solutions so that they can send the information or files they quarantine through the FortiSandbox"
"One of the valuable features is its ability to detect new threats."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"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."
"Technical support could be better."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"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."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"The reporting tools could be improved in Fortinet FortiSandbox."
"In future releases, I would like to see more automation capabilities."
"It can be difficult if you need to use the Command Line Interface (CLI). It's much easier if you only have to deal with the GUI."
"If updated, Fortinet FortiSandbox could cover other risks."
"The area I would like this solution to be improved in is the integrations for Sandbox with AI and big data ML mechanisms. I think this would be a practical improvement."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiSandbox is complex. You cannot only deploy Fortinet FortiSandbox without deploying the stack of Fortinet solutions. The implementation and integration are challenging tasks with the device and placement in the network. We needed to do POC and offloading testing."
"When you reach the maximum capacity, you cannot upgrade the solution because its hardware is very expensive."
"The product is good but it could be speedier. In addition, it's quite complex."
Digital Guardian is ranked 20th in ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) with 11 reviews while Fortinet FortiSandbox is ranked 5th in ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) with 34 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Highly customizable, helpful support, and multiple modules available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSandbox writes "Light and powerful solution design; useful to have". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Fortinet FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Trellix Network Detection and Response, Check Point SandBlast Network, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and Fortinet FortiEDR. See our Digital Guardian vs. Fortinet FortiSandbox report.
See our list of best ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) vendors.
We monitor all ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) 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.