Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Reviews

We use this product because it's a management center and it has good security.

The most valuable feature is the management center. I can do a lot of things with the console on the client.

The interface is very simple.

We have had some problems with it comes to uninstalling it, so you have to make sure that you do everything right.

We have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for approximately six years.

This is a stable product.

We have had no problems with scalability. We have approximately 500 users in our company.

I have been in contact with technical support many times, and they are very good.

I have tried BitDefender but its management center is poor. It does not have as many features as Kaspersky has.

I have also used Trend Micro One, but it's not as good as Kaspersky. In Kaspersky, the management center is very simple to use.

I have had some installation problems, but I'm doing well now.

Overall, Kaspersky is a good product. That said, there is no such thing as a perfect solution.  Trend Micro may have a better product, or BitDefender may have one that is better, but I like Kaspersky the most.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The tool's interface is good. 

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business should improve its reporting. There are also some issues in the cloud portal. The solution's pricing can be cheaper. 

I have been working with the solution for four years. 

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is stable. 

We have more than 11,000 customers for the product and it is scalable. 

My experience with customer support is good. 

Neutral

The tool's installation is easy. You can install it in a week's time. 

The solution's pricing is acceptable. 

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

Our primary use case is for protecting our desktops and critical servers. This solution is deployed on-premises. 

One of the most valuable features of this product is that it's good for endpoint protection. 

This product could be improved by integration with Linux. The one limitation this product has is that it's not compatible with and doesn't offer protection for Linux servers. It could also be easier to configure. 

We have been using this solution for six to seven years. 

Our organization has approximately 500 users of this solution. 

We have local support that we contact in case of any issues. If local support is unable to resolve it, then we connect the issue to Kaspersky. 

We haven't used any other solutions. We have used Kaspersky from the beginning. 

The installation was easy, all you need to do is install it with the installer. The configuration is a bit tricky, though. You can do it yourself if you are knowledgeable in this area, but if not, you may need help from the vendor. We had a team of three or four who handled deployment, in addition to the support we received from the vendor. 

Installation time will depend on the organization since each organization will have different things to configure. It should take somewhere between half an hour to an hour to configure, but it depends on the size of the organization. 

We implemented through an in-house team, but had vendor support. 

We pay for licensing annually. 

We also evaluated Rapid7's AppSpider product, which is an application vulnerability scanning solution. We had done the POC, but we had issues with the licensing model, so we dropped it. 

I rate Kaspersky an eight out of ten. I would 100% recommend Kaspersky to others who are considering implementation. 

We deploy it to every computer, server, and workstation within our network and also some home computers and laptops for endpoint protection.

I like how it protects the network and all the endpoints.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security could have more visibility and threat hunting. Right now, if it detects a file, it's quarantined, and then we can't find more details other than the path and the file name. We don't see what process it's warning off and how the virus got in. So, the reporting on the quarantined items, why were they quarantined, etc., could be improved.

We can't monitor outside of the network, so scalability could be improved as well.

The ability to control notifications regarding updates and licensing from one main computer would be great. At present, you have to physically go to each computer when a new agreement pops up. We have about 100 licenses, and this can be time consuming.

Technical support could be better.

I've been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for the last six to seven years.

It's pretty stable. In the last six to seven years, we have encountered problems with the memory once or twice and had them fixed.

As for scalability, we can't monitor outside of the network. For instance, if we deployed Kaspersky on laptops, we won't be able to monitor all the laptops at home. We lose control, so I think scalability could be improved as well.

My experience with technical support has been okay, but it could be better.

The initial setup was pretty easy. We deployed the administration server and then used the administration server to push all the agents, Kaspersky agent and then Kaspersky Endpoint.

It took about a day to deploy the solution in our environment with about 60 devices within the network.

We deployed it through a team in-house.

It's good, but we want more features. It's good for the price though.

The licensing cost can be about $1,300 per year.

I'm not sure how good the EDR side, the endpoint detection and protection, is. Is it based on behavioral detection or only based on file signature? Does it compare any known viruses to databases for all known viruses? Can it detect a new virus based on the behavior of the process?

If it got infected by a new virus, new malware, it may not detect it. I question if it's good for behavioral detection. I think the cloud version will be better, but I have not tried it.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security at three because other products provide more visibility and more EDR features.

We primarily use the solution for endpoint protection along with catering to Office 365, OneDrive, Teams, SharePoint, Outlook, or Exchange - along with Windows update services.

The solution has definitely improved how our organization functions.

The solution, for what it does overall, is a very attractive solution.

The price per endpoint is excellent.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's pretty easy.

The solution has been very stable for us. We haven't had any issues with performance.

The scalability is there if a company needs to expand.

The reporting portion of the solution is quite weak. It needs to be improved upon. They could do a better job of making it more robust.

There's always room for improvement in everything, however, I can't think of a specific feature that is missing or lacking.

I've been using the solution for well over a year at this point. 

The product has been extremely stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. The performance has been good.

The scalability has been good so far. I haven't run into any issues as far as scaling goes. That said, we aren't an enterprise. I've had it as high as 300 clients.

For us, we probably have about a hundred users and I'd say a large majority of those are production floor people. The rest (25 to 30) are front office staff.

I've never used technical support before. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. It's just not something I've dealt with.

We used to have Cisco AMP. We switched over to Kaspersky.

The reason we switched was really related to a price point and wanting to push out Windows updates, kind of more than device management type functionality.

We've found the initial setup to be pretty simple and straightforward. It's not overly complex. A company shouldn't have any problem with the implementation process.

The cost structure is very reasonable. It's not overly expensive, which is part of the draw of the solution.

We're using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure of the version number.

In general, we've been quite happy with the solution overall. I would rate it at a seven out of ten.

Before using the product, our organization was infected with malware attacks. 

I am impressed with the tool's main dashboard, anti-malware application blocking, DDoS, etc. 

The product needs to incorporate training programs or webinars for users. The solution needs to improve its support as well. It also needs to detect ransomware. 

I have been using the product for six years. 

I would rate the product's stability a seven out of ten. 

I would rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. My company has 240 users for the solution. 

I would rate the product's setup an eight out of ten. The deployment can be completed between 10-30 minutes. We required only two staff for the deployment process. 

The solution's deployment was done in-house. 

I would rate the tool's pricing a six out of ten. You need to pay extra costs for additional modules. The product's licensing costs are yearly. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. You need to get training before the installation. 

The solution is primarily used for protection. It's useful for internet accessing and network accessing protection and for flash memory protection from sharing, accessing, and other attacks.

The solution is very stable. It offers very good security protection.

The installation process is straightforward.

The performance is not very good. It's acceptable with the security. That said, the issue is that, when I opened the browser without Kaspersky antivirus, it's open in a few seconds, however, when I installed the antivirus on the laptop or computer and we try to open it, just open the browser, it takes double the amount of time. Without the antivirus, it's opening in four seconds and with the antivirus it's opening in 20 seconds. It's making everything hang.

We've used the solution for about two years at this point. 

The stability of the product is good, and it does offer good protection. However, the performance isn't as good, as it slows systems down.

We have about 25 users on the solution currently. 

We likely will increase usage in the near future.

I've never had to contact technical support. It's so easy I don't need to contact the help desk or technical team of Kaspersky.

Before Kaspersky, I was using ESET. We got a good offer from Kaspersky that had a lower price point and therefore we moved to them. 

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's very straightforward and very simple. 

It's a server installation. It takes about one or two hours, and the implementation for every user takes minutes as it's around in the background.

For the administration of the solution, we only need one of our technical team members to manage it. For the installation, it takes two people. It might take two or three hours before it's deployed for all of the users.

We can handle the installation ourselves, with our own in-house team.

We pay a yearly licensing fee.

This product costs less than our past solution, ESET.

We're using the latest version of the solution at this time. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

It helps me with the security policies that I make. I can change policies quickly and easily.

Also, it stopped ransomware that other vendors could not catch.

The valuable features are the antivirus, the firewall, the network blocker, and application and device control.

I would like to see improvements in the device control features, which are limited.

I can block devices by the policy in the device control such as usb and cd but i can block devices like sound that not supported by Kaspersky
I would see update in the device control policy that let me add devices by its id
To control them by block or allow it
That will help the administrator for full control and will rate the kaspersky to be the number one in the field

I have been using this solution since 2012.

There were no stability issues.

Customer Service:

Customer service is excellent.

Technical Support:

I used technical support through a vendor and they were perfect.

I previously used Symantec Endpoint. I switched because it's weak against ransomware attacks and against email attachments containing viruses and Trojan horses.

The initial setup was easy and I had no problem with it.

Pricing and licensing is good.

I evaluated other options like McAfee, Sophos, Symantec Endpoint, and FortiClient, but they weren’t good enough for me.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business provides a full suite of endpoint security features in one easy-to-manage application. With this product deployed, administrators can ensure endpoints are protected from malware, as well as perform a host of functions, such as patch and systems management, encryption of both files and whole disks, and application control. Furthermore, this tool features mobile device management and security capabilities. All this functionality can be driven from a single management console that is well integrated with the existing enterprise infrastructure.

Kaspersky is the best antivirus software to this day, always was, always will (i hope so). It offers a great protection against viruses and spywares

Kaspersky Endpoint Security offers a powerful and robust system for securing systems in a business environment. Its scanning and detection engine handles most threats easily and is well developed to deal with new threats that continually come down the pipeline. The program is also easy to use as an end user. its encryption system does a very good job of securing sensitive files without a performance hit on most systems. Endpoint also has great administrative tools for setting up the program and for ongoing maintenance purposes. As an added plus, the program also works with other non-Windows systems which can be highly valuable in a mixed system OS environment.