We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response and SonicWall Capture Client based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The setup is pretty simple."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The stability is very good."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"We have a concept of working from home. Most endpoints are not in the domain. It is our first line of defense. While we had Kaspersky deployed, it gave good insight into the upcoming challenge or threat."
"The advanced detection features are valuable."
"Kaspersky EDR offers automated response capabilities, enhancing efficiency by enabling quick investigation and response to potential threats on Android devices."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"It downloads essential security patches that are valuable for my PC."
"One of the most valuable aspects of Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions is their ability to detect and respond to spam and viruses in their early stages."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is its consolidated features."
"It is a stable solution...It is a very scalable solution."
"The most valuable features of SonicWall Capture Client are CSC (Capture Security Center), RTDMI (Real-Time Deep Memory Inspection), and the deep memory inspection feature."
"SonicWall Capture Client has a serial number to connect to your firewall."
"Overall, what I love the most about SonicWall Capture Client is its management console. SonicWall Capture Client also has the intelligence to tell you which computer is online, what OS it uses, etc. I also found the rollback feature and SentinelOne integration valuable in SonicWall Capture Client. Rollback is a powerful feature of the solution because it's similar to locking your endpoint during an attack, so you won't have to pay the hackers, particularly during ransomware attacks. That feature in SonicWall Capture Client allows you to get back your endpoint or make your endpoint right again after an attack. I also like that it isn't complex to remove the engine error from the endpoint because you only have to provide the security key from SonicWall Capture Client, so the process is simple. It's not complex."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"SonicWall Capture Client's scalability is nice."
"The solution serves as a very stable platform."
"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."
"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 had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"The support needs improvement."
"Detections could be improved."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"It needs improvement in communication between the network and endpoint, as well as between endpoint and server."
"There is room for improvement in its user interface."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response lacks configuration options."
"There are certain shortcomings with the UI of the solution. The UI is not at all user-friendly."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response needs vast resources on the central node. Not all maintenance tasks are in the GUI, so we often use commands. The lack of documentation for these processes means we frequently reach out to support, open tickets, and run complex CLI commands. It's not the most straightforward process. It should also improve stability."
"My team was struggling with the reporting when we were doing an audit. The console features are a little more interactive and user-friendly. There's some issue, or maybe some fixing has to be done."
"Enhancing user-friendliness should be a priority."
"Incorporating an AI protection tool with the capability to detect and prevent zero-day threats, particularly those with a five-star rating in terms of severity would be beneficial."
"The biggest issue with SonicWall Capture Client is network latency."
"SonicWall Capture Client could be made a little lighter than it currently is in terms of memory consumption."
"It takes technical support too long to resolve an issue."
"They should improve their user interface."
"The vulnerability reports need to be better. Windows Defender detected some issues that SonicWall Capture Client couldn't."
"An area for improvement in SonicWall Capture Client is TenantCloud support. Suppose you want to implement SonicWall Capture Client. You'll have to register it on MySonicWall. Then once your SonicWall Capture Client license expires and you don't want to renew it, you can't delete it from your MySonicWall account, so that's an area for improvement."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 24th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 15 reviews while SonicWall Capture Client is ranked 45th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 8.0, while SonicWall Capture Client is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Provides the ability to send detected malware to Kaspersky's sandbox environment for behavioral analysis". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall Capture Client writes "A stable solution that is used for endpoint security and to protect computers from malware". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with Sangfor Endpoint Secure and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas SonicWall Capture Client is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response vs. SonicWall Capture Client 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.
