"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"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."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving 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 entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"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."
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"One of the main features is the solution is very light on resources and we do not have any problems with it."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"We like that it has a free version available."
"The most valuable feature is that it comes with the package, so there is no additional installation of third-party software. It's also easy to use."
"The best feature is the fact that for certain mobiles you can control your corporate profiles versus your personal profiles. That is amazingly important. Apple just supported the separation of corporate and personal profiles, whereas Android has been doing that for quite some time... Because Android supports that, if an Android phone is lost or stolen, I can wipe out all the corporate-related information from that phone and not touch the personal side. I can separate the apps and I can separate the ability to cut and paste between apps."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is the small updates that keep my machine relatively clean from any infections."
"Defender has very little impact on the end-user and the agent works quite well with a minimal impact on the client and server."
"We have just started to implement it. It is useful for protection from malware and ransomware."
"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."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"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."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"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 connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"We encountered some issues when we were trying to enable automatic updates from our group policy."
"At times, the other antivirus products are now doing AI, in terms of understanding the behavior of the system and determining when there's an anomaly. This is something that Defender can improve on."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by making the reporting faster. It takes some time to reflect back to the administration portal of what has been updated. For example, out of 100 Computers, approximately 90 computers received updates, but when you check the administration portal over one or two days, you will only see 75, even though 90 were updated."
"The solution could use improvement on the interface."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"The price, in general, could always be a little bit cheaper."
"I would just like them to have more consistency, and that's a comment that's across the board with Microsoft. They change things a lot."
"Defender is free for one year. Once that year is over, we will switch to Kaspersky."
More F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 32nd in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 2 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 84 reviews. F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and very stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Enables ingestion of events directly into your SIEM/SOAR, but requires integration with all Defender products to work optimally". F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trend Micro Apex One, Panda Security Adaptive Defense and McAfee Endpoint Security, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, SentinelOne and Malwarebytes. See our F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (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.
