Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum Reviews

We use Kaspersky Endpoint Security to provide support to our customers. The new version and configuration settings are like production components.

There are many who would consider the performance in some of our systems to be slow, although this depends on the RAM and other features. The solution enables us to get feedback from our customers.

I have found the security, device, web, and application controls to be the most valuable features.

So too, the firewall has allowed me to do much troubleshooting.

The application running speed consumes that of RAM, so performance speed is an issue. The data, VST, and EST sizes can all be reduced. 

Previously, some of the Windows Seven PCs took up more space and ran slowly all the time. 

Some of the remote antivirus desktop sharing is not working in version 13, which is still in use. 

When we upgrade to network agent version 13, the machine makes a duplicate copy of itself. It is created in another group. Under the same name, we will see two devices, one the original and the other the duplicate. Afterward, we move to the client's PC.

Occasionally troubleshooting is required because the solution does not work after being configured. As an example of this, the running time may be longer when it involves cloud-based SaaS remote installation. At other times, the process cannot be completed and I must remove the task, switch to manual mode or begin a new task. 

The solution is stable. It is good and I like it. Before going with it, I was not aware of its capabilities. It removes the element of worry.

The solution is scalable.

While the technical support we can supply ranges from installation to troubleshooting, all other issues involved. bugs or updates made to versions would lead us to create a ticket with that of Kaspersky Endpoint Security. 

We did not previously use a different solution. 

With us, the deployment took the minimum amount of time. But, with some of my clients, it took more than a day. 

When it comes to the assistance I can lend the client, I suggest that he make a plan which would allow him to do the maximum amount of remote usage. 

We handled the deployment on our own. 

As my role is limited to that of support, I cannot conjecture as to the prices. 

The solution is both on-premises and cloud-based. Kate:

Our organization handles things on the partner side, supplying remote support throughout India. All its constituents are in IT positions. 

There are many organizations making use of the solution. 

When it comes to the implementation of the solution, we provide all the necessary support, from installation to troubleshooting. 

I was not aware of Kaspersky Endpoint Solution and its features before entering this field but now am acquainted with its components and protection software. I learned a lot on the software side. 

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security as an eight out of ten. 

Over the years, I have learned that we always need to keep updating our OS — especially Windows. Any application that sits on Windows needs to be updated. This allows us to better detect and remove any infections. Sometimes, there are a few infections that we can't get rid of. In this case, we have to find another way to clean up the registry; otherwise, we have to reinstall everything again.

In terms of the interface, I prefer something that is simple without so much color. 

I have been using this solution for the last 10 years. 

This solution is stable. 

Reaching their support team can be difficult. I've dealt with Sophos before; they were quite responsive to our issues.

We are actually going to be switching to Sophos Endpoint Security.

I think the price of this solution is good. 

Make sure you are online in order to receive updates. The engine itself doesn't do much without updated data. With updates, you'll be at least 90% protected.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

We use this solution to secure our endpoint devices.

With Kaspersky, we are licensed for 300 users. Eight technical engineers handle all maintenance-related issues. 

The reporting feature is good. Also, the device control is good. 

This solution used a lot of memory and GPU; it would be nice if this could be reduced. 

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for roughly five years.

The initial setup is easy. 

We installed this solution ourselves. 

Licensing is on a yearly basis. We have a three-year license.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Kaspersky Endpoint Security a rating of eight.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others.

We are using this solution for endpoint protection against intrusions, such as viruses.

One of the main features of this solution is the fast scanning capabilities.

I would like to see better-enhanced features, such as protection against ransomware and different types of malicious malware.

In an upcoming release, I would like to see DLP, encryption, and a VPN feature. There are a lot of other solutions coming out which claim they have all these features together.

I have been using this solution for two years.

I have found the solution to be stable.

We have over 3,000 users using the solution in my organization and the solution is scalable.

The technical support has been great. When we log a ticket we receive a solution shortly after.

We were previously using Symantec.

The setup was easy and not challenging.

The price of the solution is reasonable. It is less costly compared to competitors.

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security a seven out of ten.

We are using this solution for endpoint protection.

The main feature of this solution is it is easy to use.

I would like to see integration to many different systems easier.

I have been using the solution for approximately one year.

The solution has been stable the past year we have been using it.

I have found the solution stable. We have 1,800 users using this solution in my organization.

We have not had any issue with the solution that we would need to contact the technical support.

There is a license required for this solution and we have 1,800 licenses. The cost is a bit high and we are looking for an alternative.

We are currently looking for an alternative solution and have evaluated Microsoft Defender.

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security a seven out of ten.

I use the solution for security protection.

The solution sometimes slows down the computers of our clients, the performance needs to improve.

I have been using the solution for approximately five years.

We have over 1,000 users using the solution in our organization and the solution has been able to handle it.

Our technical team did the installation of the solution.

We have been evaluating other solutions to change in the near future.

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security a six out of ten.

We use the solution for protection against viruses, spyware, and malware.

The solution is user-friendly and the dashboard is good.

When we connect to the solutions' website they block out our VPN connection. This causes us some difficulties. Additionally, when we use the solution on the laptop it uses more memory resources and becomes slower.

I have been using the solution for approximately six months.

The solution and its platform are reliable and stable.

The solution is very scalable. We have approximately 79 employees using the solution in my organization.

The setup of the solution is easy.

When comparing this solution to others, such as Alpha Security & Antivirus, it is more compact and the firewall is better.

I would recommend this solution to others. However, make sure you have the appropriate amount of resources to handle it. If you do not have adequate resources this will impact the performance of the computer.

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security an eight out of ten.

We're using the solution primarily for protection and security. We use it for malware protection. 

The antivirus feature is very, very good. It offers us good protection.

The solution is quite stable. It's reliable.

The scalability of the solution is excellent.

We have found the installation to be very quick and very straightforward.

The price of the solution is a bit high. It would be nice if it was less expensive. We're using a lot of devices, and therefore the costs add up.

I've been using the solution for the last two years or so. It's been a while.

The solution offers very good stability. It's reliable. The performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. We haven't had any problems with it.

We have more than 1,000 users on the solution currently.

We've found the scalability to be quite good so far.

We likely will increase usage in the future.

We've reached out to technical support in the past. We've found them to be quite good. They are helpful and responsive. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide to us.

The initial setup is not too difficult or overly complex. The implementation, for the most part, is straightforward, and the deployment is quick. It doesn't take much more than five minutes. 

We handled the implementation ourselves, in-house. We did not need the assistance of any integrator or consultant.

The solution can be a bit pricy. Especially if you have to cover many devices, it can get expensive. The price compounds.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I cannot recall the version number off-hand.

We use multiple deployment versions, including on-premises and cloud versions.

I would recommend the solution to other companies. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been pretty happy with its capabilities in general.

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 security and protection.

We haven't had any major issues with the solution overall. It's quite a reliable product so far.

The stability has been reliable so far.

The pricing has been quite good and very reasonable.

We found the installation to be very straightforward and the deployment process to be very fast.

We've found that sometimes the solution is not doing its job in detecting some malware. They need to make sure that they are advancing their technology to catch more malicious events. There needs to be more security in place specifically on the malware side of things.

I've used the solution for two years. It has been a while.

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance has been reliable so far. 

The scalability hasn't really been tested by our organization. We've never tried to expand it, and therefore I can't speak to how successful expanding it may be for other companies. 

We only have two users of the solution in our company.

At this time, we likely won't keep using the solution.

I've never opened any tickets with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. I've never dealt with them directly.

The installation was not complex at all. It was very straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process.

The deployment was also quite quick. It only takes a few minutes, if I recall the process correctly. It's not long and drawn out. It's easy.

I handled the implementation myself. It's not difficult. I did not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant at all. 

At the time, when we purchased the solution, the company was giving us the best deal on the market. It's the reason why we ended up choosing it. I don't recall the licensing aspects or if we had to pay for it, and if so, how much.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. 

I haven't suffered from a malicious attack, and therefore I'm treating it quite high, as it is doing what we need it to do. The protection levels so far have been sufficient.

It's a good solution that companies should consider if other options are not available to them.