Kaspersky Next EDR Expert Reviews

Our company uses the solution for endpoint detection. We started with the cloud service but our experience was not very positive so we moved to the on-premises solution. 

The detection engine running on endpoints works very well and provides a good protection level. We had several infection attempts but all were captured and blocked by the solution with no ransomware or malware running wild in our network.

The SD engine is very powerful and profound. 

The solution can integrate with external SIM solutions or external SOCs like CrowdStrike or Microsoft Defender.  

The interfacing for remote endpoints could be improved because it does not work very smoothly. 

It is not easy to follow the kill chain of a potential infection or malware. We would like to be able to roll back and analyze all the steps in the chain. 

The on-premises solution is not fully aligned with the web-based option that includes a feature-rich interface. For example, you can analyze better on the web console than with the on-premises management console. 

It is complex to implement remote endpoints for visitors who have devices that are outside the control of your network but are on-premises. The solution did not even offer this until recently but instead provided an additional solution for integrating the functionality. The solution needs to focus on providing a completely cloud-based solution like CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, and Microsoft Defender.

The solution still works on the old signature-based antivirus format but modern options like CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, and Microsoft Defender are behavioral analysis tools that are completely signature-less. The solution is losing customers because it has not reacted quickly enough to the modern format. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable. We had a couple of issues with the SD engine failing which caused users to experience a lowering of endpoint service. 

The solution is a very mature product and not a new player like CrowdStrike. Features have been added on a rather old engine or structure that runs on 32 bits. 

If you have a 64-bit operating system like the newer Windows, you need an engine aligned with this architecture. 

We have 150 endpoints so have not reached a level where we need to scale up. The next level is at 500 or 1,000 endpoints. 

We are lucky to have direct access with Kaspersky. 

We opened tickets with support a couple of times and their reactiveness was fine but not first level. 

I had prior experience with the solution so setup was easy because the management console has not changed much over the years. 

In general, the initial setup is a bit cumbersome. You can start easily but might need help creating different profiles, accessing old features, or realizing the solution's full potential. 

It is useful to have guidance from a business partner or the vendor directly. In our case, we were lucky to have support from the vendor. 

We worked with the vendor for our implementation. 

Ongoing maintenance is easily managed by two technicians. 

The solution is worth its cost so I rate pricing a ten out of ten. 

We did a comparison before provisioning the solution, but it was not profound. We needed to move from our prior solution due to regulatory issues and constraints so had to make a quick decision. 

We are currently evaluating other options, not from a technical point of view but because of the war. Companies in Ukraine have constraints that are forcing us to move from Russian software providers. 

I rate the solution a six out of ten. 

We use Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response for threat protection.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response has helped our company in many ways. Since we have been using this solution has have not had issues compared to other solutions we have used.

The most valuable features of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response are all the features. The features have all helped us and most recently malware has been an issue in our company and malware protection has been effective. 

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response should continue to improve its protection while adapting to the changing threat ecosystems. Having more advanced features would be a benefit.

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response for approximately four years.

The stability of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is good.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is scalable.

We have approximately 250 end-user accounts with ten servers using this solution. we have a combination of people using the solutions, such as IT specialists, business users, operation staff, marketing personnel, marketing team, compliance officers, finance, and general IT personnel.

Next year, we will look at the number of new users, and what's required for the company. The company is in the process of improving the business, opening more and more branches in Ireland. There are another 30 to 40 users to be added to the package in the future.

The support we are receiving from Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response has been very good.

We were previously using ESET Antivirus and we were having a lot of problems. Since we migrated to Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response we have been protected very well.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response has a simple setup. We deployed the solution in approximately one day.

We have a separate server receiving day-to-day, updates and patches. Then we have in Ireland, a branch network where it is connected. We have an agent server that is connected to the main server. From the main server, it pushes the day-to-day update to the particular agent server. From the agent server, it will push to the endpoint user devices.

We used a vendor support team of two people and our IT team of two for the implementation of the solution.

I have not quantified the ROI. However, I was using another solution previously with a potential for user data loss and now I do not experience this. We have been clean since we have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response and in this sense, we have received a return on investment benefit.

There is an annual license to use Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response. The price overall is a bit expensive when compared to other solutions. There are not any additional fees other than the license.

I rate the price of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response a three out of five.

We did evaluate other solutions before choosing Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response.

I would recommend others to use this solution.

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response an eight out of ten.

I cannot give a security solution a ten out of ten because the threat stage is always changing and the protection could fail at any time. There is always room for improvement.

We use the solution to create a test scenario for detecting a potential threat in the network.

The solution's cybersecurity policies help us protect some extensions of the primary documents in case of a ransomware attack. Also, in case endpoint servers get compromised, it protects them. Thus, we can manage exclusive and essential extensions for systems using it.

The solution's most valuable feature is machine learning. It monitors the traffic and events to detect suspicious activity.

They should include XDR features in the solution. It would help us collect data metrics from different endpoints. Thus, we could identify the origin of the ransomware or malware attacks within the network. Also, they should include sandboxing features.

We have been using the solution for three years.

I rate the solution's stability an eight.

The solution's deployment process involves configuring the network and changing the active directory. The most challenging part here is opening specific ports and blocking or allowing certain services through firewall settings.

The solution's cost is reasonable compared to other vendors.

I suggest a cost versus-benefit analysis to others while looking for EDR and XDR solutions. Considering the advantages of Kaspersky, it offers patch and vulnerability management. It takes time to deploy initially. But once you deploy it correctly, you will get a lot of features. I rate it as an eight.

Kaspersky EDR is an advanced version of the company's standard security solution that provides some enhanced detection and response features. Cost-wise, it's not much more than their other solution. 

Kaspersky is trying to push clients to adopt EDR because they plan to consolidate everything into one solution. EDR incorporates all the features available in Kaspersky's other products. 

If a customer wants to use Kaspersky on-prem, they'll need to spend a lot on the hardware. Their server must be strong because EDR is a heavy product. You need excellent hardware to run it. It might make sense to deploy the solution in the cloud. If they add features, it will only make the product heavier and increase the hardware costs. 

I have used Kaspersky EDR for about three years.

I rate Kaspersky EDR seven out of 10 for stability.

I rate Kaspersky EDR seven out of 10 for scalability.

I rate Kaspersky support eight out of 10. It depends on your SLA. You need to wait in line with standard support, but you get help immediately if you purchase business support.

Positive

I wouldn't say that Kaspersky is a walk in the park to install, but it isn't too complex. Anyone with a little training and knowledge can install and configure it. 

I rate Kaspersky EDR seven out of 10 for affordability. Kaspersky EDR isn't cheap, but it shouldn't be out of reach for most medium-sized enterprises. It is a small price jump from their advanced endpoint security solution. Small companies may not be able to spend that much. It should be within the budget of any company with more than 300 employees should.

We compared Kaspersky and Trend Micro. The latter is significantly more expensive. That's the main difference. 

I rate Kaspersky EDR eight out of 10. It's one of the top three solutions, but it isn't my No. 1. 

It's our primary, go-to product for email security. It covers our inbound and outbound mail. If somebody clicks on a bad link inside your company, it will automatically stop them from using that email to spread the rest of the phishing attempts. It checks outbound emails, not just inbound.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

There are about 12 users in my organization. 

If we get a new employee, we'll buy another license. Otherwise, we don't have plans to increase usage. It scales with the amount of staff that we have.

It doesn't matter from where you log in, you're going to go through the Barracuda gateway. It will protect and filter any incoming mail. There's also a sandboxing feature. If Barracuda picks up something that's a little bit fishy, it will detonate it in the sandbox.

If it's not malicious, it'll pass it on. If it is malicious, it'll just quarantine it. The nice thing is that sometimes Barracuda doesn't know if the mail is good or bad for you. It gives you the option to allow delivery or to block delivery of that particular kind of mail.

If someone is trying to send you mail but is being blocked by your gateway, you can go into your Barracuda portal, see the last mail that came in, and you can choose from different options: allow/don't allow, deliver, once only, block user, or whatever the case may be.

In some cases, we can also restrict it, but only the admin can do that. If you have a problem and one of your clients can't send you mail, you need to contact the admin IT manager and tell them that you're expecting mail from a certain email address but you've been blocked. He will then allow the delivery of that. It gives you control over what gets delivered to your end users from an IT manager's point of view.

Encryption is the most valuable feature. It creates an encryption tunnel from your location to the delivery address. It's like a tunnel that can't be broken so that your mail can't be intercepted anywhere along the line. When you're using Barracuda as a gateway, your mail is guaranteed to be delivered as it was sent.

The other nice thing about the solution is that it's an archiver, which most companies need for compliance.

For e-discovery, a lot of legal companies need certain documents and for emails to be kept intact as they were sent. It acts as a paper trail.

It's pretty stable. It's older than Mimecast. The management tool is web-based, so it's also convenient.

It's managed on Barracuda Cloud Control. It covers spam, email viruses, email malware, phishing, undelivered mail, unsecured emails, and denial of service attacks. It's agentless and because it's an all-in-one product, it covers basically everything.

I would rate the scalability as 10 out of 10.

The difficulty of setup will depend on the number of users. It's scalable with the amount of users that you have. Setup with 1,000 users will obviously take longer than 10 users.

There is a labor cost involved in implementation. It takes about seven hours to deploy. There are a lot of different aspects involved in setup. It's not a simple implementation.

Once implemented, it's easy to maintain. Once the setup is done, it's fairly easy.

If you've given all your users rights, they can decide what mail comes through what doesn't. This makes an IT manager's job a lot easier. If you've kept the retention and everything needs to come through the admin or IT office but you send the alerts to the customer, then it's going to be pretty intensive depending on how many users you have.

The solution isn't the cheapest considering what you get. I would rate the pricing as seven out of ten.

The cost depends on what features you want. If you want to add advanced email security and compliance, advanced threat protection, cloud archiving services, and data loss protection, then there will be an additional cost.

I would rate the solution as nine out of ten. 

I would recommend complete compliance for most customers because it offers you email security services. It provides inbound and outbound scanning, blocking, and sandboxing.

It gives you data loss protection, encryption, and link and typosquatting protection. It also gives you advanced threat protection and cloud archiving services. That is all-in-one email protection.

Currently, I'm using Kaspersky as endpoint protection and EDR.

I'm using it for detecting malicious behavior on PCs. It's for security.

In terms of effectiveness, it's the best. 

It is easy to set up. 

The product is stable. 

We can scale the solution. 

I can't say which areas need improvement. 

We'd like to see them improve the automatic response. 

I've been using the solution for three years. 

It's a stable, reliable solution. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We've had zero issues in general while using the product. 

The scalability has been good. 

Kaspersky is installed on all PCs and servers. It is used extensively in the organization. There is likely over 1,000 users. 

We only used support once. We found a malicious file in an email, and we opened a ticket with them to deal with the issue. They were very effective. They resolved the issue and provided us with text to update the KATA directories.

Positive

The solution is simple to set up. It's not a complex process. 

We tested it with different scenarios, such as MITRE ATT&CK, and we did the same scenario across all vendors. This solution came out on top.

I'm a customer and end-user.

We did a POC with the solution and were quite impressed by its effectiveness. 

If someone is working in a virtual environment, they should consider a virtual solution like Kaspersky from the beginning. It helps save memory usage.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It is a very effective tool.

We are users of this solution and I'm a system administrator and lead manager of the Kaspersky EDR solution in my company. 

In my opinion Kaspersky is the best product on the market. It's very easy to handle, user-friendly and they provide a lot of features that are difficult to find in other endpoint solutions.  Kaspersky provides great features and endpoint protection. 

The only problem we have with the solution is that DLP is not a part of it. It's particularly relevant for those working in financial markets, especially in Pakistan where it's deployed in banks. DLP would make EDR a complete package. The lack of DLP is the main reason that our company is moving away from Kaspersky EDR. 

I've been using this solution for five years. 

It's very stable and I haven't faced any issues.

The solution is very scalable. We have approximately 300 users in the company. 

We've had many interactions with technical support. We use the online Kaspersky company portal to raise tickets, and the staff are very knowledgeable technically and very professional. In so many ways, and so many queries I was in coordination with them directly. The email support is also very good. 

The initial setup is very simple and there were no issues with deployment. 

Kaspersky offers a very budget-friendly licensing model that is a complete package and is suitable for small, medium or enterprise organizations. McAfee, for example, has a much more costly license.

I've looked at other solutions including McAfee and most offer the same level of endpoint protection. Kaspersky provides additional features that other products don't have.

I'm very satisfied with this product overall and I rate it 10 out of 10. 

We primarily use this solution for users, servers, and services that we have implemented in our company.

The most valuable features are the reports.

There are no issues with this solution. However, we would like to have better strategic information. We currently have tactical, and it's hard to make strategic decisions based on what it delivers.

In addition, we have about 600 users using this solution.

We have been using this solution for over four years. It is deployed on-premises.

I rate the technical support a six out of ten because the support depends on the type of contract we have. We have a special contract, so we just need to submit a case and get a response within 24 hours.

Our licensing costs are annual.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is used for detecting cyber attacks.

What I like best about Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is that it can detect any cyber attack and that it's a reliable product in the cybersecurity space. My company has confidence in it as a product for detecting all cyber attacks. It's a reliable product.

An area for improvement in Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its technical support because currently, technical support is delayed.

My experience with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is three or four years, and I'm still working with it.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is a stable product because I didn't see any issues when I was using it.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response can be scaled to other solutions, for example, we used an antivirus first, then expanded to EDR using the same console and same server for management, and in the future, we can top it up with a sandbox solution on the same console.

The technical support provided for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response needs to be faster.

Setting up Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is easy. You can deploy it from the server or the main console. How long the deployment of the tool would take would depend on the network traffic during deployment and on the endpoint quantity.

Pricing for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is so-so when you compare it with its competitors. Its pricing isn't cheap nor expensive.

I'm a product manager that handles Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response. My company is a distributor and reseller of the product in Thailand.

I don't remember the exact version number of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response, but I'm using its latest version.

My rating for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is eight out of ten.

If I had the chance to speak to others, my advice would be to use Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response.

We primarily use the solution for security purposes, as an antivirus. It prevents threats to our business. Our aim is to make sure that our machines are protected at all times.

It's just running in the background. It doesn't bother us, and we don't even notice it is there.

It helps improve security in our organization. The protection on offer is good. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The solution could always be more secure. Every antivirus solution could be, as things are always dynamically changing. There is always a new risk on the horizon. 

I've used the solution for over three years. 

The solution is stable. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We haven't had any issues at all. 

I can't speak to the scalability of the product. It's not an aspect that I handle. 

We have about 1,000 people on the solution right now. 

We do not plan to increase usage. It depends on the number of employees that we have. If the number increases, then we usually increase usage since any machine that comes into our network must have an antivirus on it.

I've never dealt with support. I can't speak to how their services are. 

It is simple to set up and configure. We haven't had any issues with the process. it's not complex. 

I'm not sure how long it took to deploy.

There are three people in our organization that can deploy and maintain the product. 

We have enough people in terms of implementation and management as we have multiple sites that are managed by different people.

We tend to use the latest version of the solution in our organization. I can't speak to the exact version number. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I tested it on my personal computer before and found it worked fine. It's a reputable antivirus. I don't have a problem with it.

As a customer, I am satisfied. I'd rate it nine out of ten.