Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Reviews

My primary use case of this solution is to use a large enterprise endpoint protection for our computers and servers. 

I value the modular capability to house the network, device, web and email protection. Additionally, the central management policies are valuable.

We have experienced problems with downloads and integration in the past. I think it would be good for them to consider cloud integration capabilities.

The stability of this product on a scale of one to five, is a four.

I would rate the scalability as a four out of five stars.

We use a local partner who helps us with tech support. We are happy with the services they have provided.

We switched to Kaspersky Endpoint Security because we found our previous solution did not meet our requirements.

The initial setup was difficult, because we did not know the product. 

When choosing a product, we review product functionality, financial concerns and effective deployment. We looked at McAfee and others.

Kaspersky is fairly good with endpoint management. Though, we do not use Kaspersky at our mail security levels because our mail security is done by another product that we use.

So far, performance has been okay. We just updated to the latest version.

It has improved our performance and deployment.

• The main thing for us is that we get our reporting.
• Deployment and centralized management are essential for us because of the number of loads that we have along with the number of geographic locations where we are based.
• If any policy has been breached, it will send you a report.
  

• I would like to see machine learning and AI as added features.
• It would be nice if they had a separate email security solution (instead of only their cloud edition), similar to what Forcepoint and Trend Micro have. 
• I would rate their encryption as a one out of 10. It needs a lot of improvement.
• There are some features built into Kaspersky that do not work at all, so we have to use other products instead.

It is a fairly stable product. 

There have been some disturbances going on in the market due to potential leaking of information, but I don't think we are very much concerned about what's happening in the global space. We know our data is secure at our level. We backing up our data and it is doing its job

It is a scalable product. We have been able to create a number of groups where we were to allow policies and deny policies. Another solution did allow us to do this, but we found it was not user-friendly.

The technical support is not very good. I think my mind fixes things before they get it together. I would rate the technical support as a three or four out of 10.

In the past, we went with Trend Micro. It was okay, but we needed a change, and we opted for Kaspersky. It had a lot more features from an endpoint management standpoint. We found it better in terms of deployment. Normally, with the other solutions, we would face issues with deployment.

The initial setup was not a problem for my team.

The vendor came in to help initially, but in the end, we set it up ourselves. 

I don't think it is a good product from a support standpoint.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

1. The product should work and do what it promises.
2. The vendor and product should have a roadmap.
3. Support.

Kaspersky performs well. While heavy on the client, it is very efficient. 

It works better than the previous solution. 

It is very efficient. I like its simplicity.

• We would like to know where attacks are coming from.
• It is hard to maintain the software and upgrade.
• Sometimes, there are issues with filtering. E.g., I want to take out the message for an exclusion. Sometimes, this exclusion might become hard, because I use a lot of internal software, or the software is post positive. 

The product is very stable.

The scalability is good.

I have never used technical support.

We were previously using Symantec. I switched to Kaspersky because it was simpler and more efficient.

The initial setup was complex.

I received a very good deal with Kaspersky.

While I would recommend Kaspersky, I am now looking for a more complete solution as my business grows. I am looking for something that gives me the protection I need and an entire view of our network. I am currently looking at Trend Micro and Carbon Black.

Most important criteria when selecting endpoint security vendors: 

• Dependable
• Good reviews.

To protect my endpoint computer.

It helps minimize breach of data and stabilize our network.

Device protection.

Web Control and vulnerability need work.

For preventing virus spreads in our networks (servers and PCs). In my experience, Kaspersky products have comprehensive and quick zero-day response for global and local (Indonesia) threats, including spam, Trojans, worms, etc.

My environment consists of 30 servers and 200 PCs and laptops with no USB and CD/DVD media restriction. Eighty percent of all clients have internet connection without any restriction policy.

Decreases IT threats, incidents from outside the environment as well as internal. Reduces cost and time when handling incidents, including mitigation, restore backup, recovery, reducing/preventing file/data error caused by the threat.

Antivirus, including anti-spam, trojan, and worm detection and prevention. Kaspersky has a comprehensive virus definition update which is very helpful for threat prevention.

The need to re-engineer the source code to reduce CPU and memory usage. Other areas for improvement include a data-loss prevention solution, enhanced application control, enhanced device control, an endpoint security encryption solution, an advanced persistent threats (APT) solution, and an all-in-one solution with one pricing scheme for corporate and enterprise business needs.

I rate it at seven out of 10. It would be an eight if they could decrease memory and CPU usage.

Endpoint antivirus and malware protection for mobile users and their laptop computers. We have experimented with mobile devices, but have not needed to establish corporate protections on mobiles until recently.

Kaspersky has proven to offer very good protection to all our PC users. We also have it installed on our Mac clients and it is performing well.

Kaspersky Enterprise solution's combined protections have helped to block a lot of malware which would have caused a lot of interruptions in our operations.

The solution is very draining on the computers at certain moments in its operation, excluding the scanning periods that make the computer unusable until finished. It is a balance between economic protection and client machine performance to our users. Most of the time, it is an excellent solution.

It has improved my organization because the admin tools are easy to use.

The admin tools are the most valuable feature because they are easy to use.

It allows for a solid form of risk management as well as a measure of remote device management. It is very hands off, which I appreciate. 

Utilizing the CPU usages during the scan process needs to be improved.

The customer service is solid. I have never had a problem getting through to someone. They have always been able to help me with any problems or questions.

• Custom package deployments 
• The user interface is easy to maintain once it is setup.
• The Client is very low-resource. Some of the systems that I have deployed it on are older, and it does not eat up a lot of system resources.

It is a cost-effective endpoint security service.

Since introduced years ago, it has been used to prevent various types of malware infections. It has also introduced additional features for firewalling to better control applications regarding network activities.

Initially, it did greatly improve the security. However, as many of us know, signature-based malware prevention is not very useful anymore. Aside from not stopping all threats, it is not very good for the performance of the system, and especially with older devices, it has a noticeable impact. But in regard to other legacy solutions, I do believe Kaspersky is one of the better ones.

Especially the firewalling, I found useful, as you can control the applications and services on a granular level to tell them where they have access to or not. 

The policies are easy to make and controlled by the Kaspersky Administrative Security Center, which comes at no additional costs.

Malware protection for Kaspersky should be revolutionized, where they no longer work with signatures, but with more advanced ways of detecting malware, such as Cylance or Traps from Palo Alto.