Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Reviews

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is used for system security.

The performance of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been a valuable feature.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by adding more security features.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for approximately five years.

The stability of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is good.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

We have approximately 30 people using the solution in my organization.

We have used eScan Endpoint Security.

The initial installation of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is straightforward. After the operating system was installed the solution only took a few minutes to install.

We did the implementation ourselves.

We have a local team of ten engineers that provide support to the solution.

The solution is included with Microsoft Windows.

If anyone is looking for an antivirus instantly, they can enable Microsoft Defender for Endpoint on their Windows operating system. If they are still thinking of buying endpoint security in the future. They can use the Microsoft Defender for Endpoint in the meantime.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for threat management and pallet management.

Threat intelligence is one of the most valuable features in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. It's one of the key benefits we enjoy from the solution. The built-in Windows protection is another key benefit we like about the solution.

We've also integrated Microsoft Defender for Endpoint with the SIEM, for pallet management. It went smoothly and there were no challenges.

An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release is for this product to be more flexible when integrating with third-party systems.

Another feature I'd like to see in this product is the sandbox, particularly a third-party sandbox. This feature will help us give better service.

It's been six months since I've started using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

This solution has very good stability.

This solution is scalable.

Microsoft's technical support is good.

The initial setup for this solution was easy, but after the basic configuration, particularly the integration with other tools, there was some struggle initially, but later on, integration went through. Integration with third-party systems had some complexity involved.

Compared to ESET, the pricing for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is on the higher side.

I evaluated ESET and ArcSight.

Currently, we have not experienced or seen any challenges with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

Our customers are mostly medium-sized companies.

My advice to people thinking about implementing Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is that it is good, in relation to Windows, but if they want to have a holistic product in relation to Linux and other systems, they need to consider other products.

I'm rating Microsoft Defender for Endpoint an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for cloud security. It was used for threat detection and endpoint to endpoint.

The product can be used for organizations that use Microsoft as their primary security defender and need zero-day threat protection. It's good for companies that want to make sure there are no threats or attacks on their information.

It's one of the best antiviruses on the market.

The solution could be even more secure and provide an even higher level of security.

I've been using the solution for more than two months at this point.

We have a team of up to four or five people that use the solution.

I've never contacted technical support or worked with them on any issues. 

The installation is very straightforward and the deployment is quick as well. 

While I recall the deployment not taking too much time, I don't remember the exact amount, as it was already installed by my team here. It was likely less than ten minutes.

You only need roughly four people, at a maximum, to install the solution. You need one good manager and four or five engineers.

I can handle the installation process myself. 

In order to use the solution, a base subscription is required.

We are always using the latest version of the solution.

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

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations.

We use this solution to protect and blocks any threats. We use it for protection.

This solution is not secure, which is why I have moved to Linux.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could be more secure.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for two years.

I have not yet used technical support.

It comes preinstalled with the OS. There is no need for any deployment. There is no installation or any other steps needed.

The installation of the host OS was easy.

I installed the OS myself.

There is no licensing fee. It comes included with the Windows license.

I don't recommend this solution.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a five out of ten.

Our primary use case centers around blocking viruses on my personal laptop.

I'm working as a private contractor. In this regard, you can say this tool ensures I'm working with a product that gets updated regularly without me having to remember to do it. Since it's a Microsoft product, I'm confident that it requires a low use of system resources. The benefit of that being that my computer isn't constantly being drained.

One of the most valuable features of this product is the ability to "set it and forget it." I don't go in and make any changes to the settings. Another value add is the size of the user base, which is fairly large because it's a free MS product. I would imagine that it would be quite competitive since a blacklisting solution such as this is only as good as the threat intelligence it receives. I'm pretty sure that if the tool discovers something foreign and malicious it will upload that information back to Microsoft. The value of the tool is inherent within the size of the user base, which is fairly large because it's a free product by a trusted company.

I'm sure the premium product has extra features, like listing questionable websites. Defender is just an antivirus product. It would be nice to have a paid upgrade that would provide additional screening of the day-to-day activities.

I haven't had any noticeable issues with it. It's quite stable.

It's very easy to set up. With admin rights, it really is very straightforward. All you need to do is install the tool and then download the definitions. 

Deployment was just basically downloading from Microsoft. It was very straightforward.

I'm currently evaluating the performance of Defender against third-party antivirus software products to see if I should continue with third-party products or just use Windows Defender.

My additional advice would be to create a test user group, deploy the software to those test users and then monitor those users as part of a log management operations center and run comparisons over several months. Comparing those users, against other users perhaps using a third-party product, like Symantec, would allow for calculation of performance and progress metrics. Based on that, a decision can be made as to whether to deploy the software across the organization or not.

I'd give this tool a rating of 8 out of 10. It's got good detection rates, low on system resources, doesn't interfere or hamper workflows, and it's easy to use.

I use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for an antivirus solution.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could provide us with a more holistic approach, such as collaboration. They can provide us with an environment from where we can manage all the endpoints from one central location, such as overall management.

I have used Microsoft Defender for Endpoint within the last 12 months.

The solution has good performance, I have not seen a problem.

I have used ClowdStrike previously.

The initial setup is easy.

I did the implementation of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

The price of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is reasonable. Other solutions are more expensive, such as ClowdStrike.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint only provides a basic level of security. I don't find it overly useful or appealing. I can trade it with another endpoint security solution. It's an addition to other endpoint security solutions.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a five out of ten.

The solution is used to protect the endpoint. Also, there's an antivirus and then advanced threat protection. It's also detecting threats and sending that to the cloud and correlating that without the events from other parts of the EMS suites. That's primarily what we are using it for. It is also capable of doing some attack surface reduction that you can configure on the endpoint. It's basic protection plus surveillance. It's also an EDR, however, we are not using that.

It's always very difficult to measure, however, it integrates very well with the other Microsoft products. It's easy to handle them. That's an important point when you want to achieve a higher security level that it's easy to manage. You can be sure that it's up to date and it's managed and the alarms are taking care of and so on. It's not only the technical capabilities, that are important. How it plays together with the rest of your products is also key.

It's not really visible for the user - which is a benefit. 

We know it's pretty good in terms of detecting threats against our platform and attacks. We have seen that.

There's privileged escalation or lateral movements for attacks.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good.

The dashboards could be better. There's a suite of different products that play together and enhance security and receive signals from different parts of the product suites. When you are trying to look into that sort of depth on a dashboard, or across various dashboards, it can be difficult to obtain a comprehensive overview as it's so divided.

The initial setup can be a bit complex. 

Beyond that, I'm not involved in the day-to-day operation. There may be others that can offer more insights.

We started using it when we started to migrate to Windows 10 and that was likely four years ago. However, that was the Microsoft basic version. Recently, we also enabled the ATP path.

It's my understanding that the solution is very stable. It's a pretty mature solution.

In terms of scalability, we have not encountered any issues. We have around 7,000 end points.

We don't have too many physical people dealing with the solution. We have some people in operations and then some architects and so on, however, they are not involved on a day-to-day basis.

The initial setup is somewhat complex, however, that's not only due to the product. It's also the environment that it is going to be implemented into. Also, when you have a company with a lot of legacy products and all the setups and so on there may be difficulties in terms of getting everything to work together.

The deployment can take up to a couple of months, however, it's dependant on the environment that it needs to be implemented into. For instance, if other kinds of agents are writing on the computer, you need to make sure that it is not consuming too much CPU capacity and so on. If you have a good system, it would be very quick to install.

We have a deployment plan and we have taken advice from Microsoft Learning from their onboarding Planning information. There isn't anything that is very special, as, when you roll out new software on an endpoint, you must make sure that it's not disturbing the day-to-day operation. You start with a small group of test users and then do it in bigger and bigger waves and always be ready to go back. It's good to have that preparedness so that you can roll back and you can investigate what's gone wrong and so on, however that's not special to a different endpoint. That's a normal deployment strategy.

It has been possible to reduce the use of other agents. Beyond that, we have not made any financial calculations in relation to ROI. We have been using McAfee, for example, among others, and it's been possible to scale down. Microsoft is more integrated, more comprehensive, and Defender is part of the Microsoft operating system.

We are customers and end-users.

This Microsoft security platform is very much a SAS platform. It's playing together with all the other security products from Microsoft and the company is using the Azure platform to collect the information and to work on the main refine security findings. It's working very well together with the Microsoft Cloud solution for security.

It's my understanding that they call it the security graph. It's quite important that they are communicating together. Windows Defender, ATP is delivering a lot of telemetry to that form and correlating it with telemetries.

The reason why we have implemented DHCP part is due to the fact that we bought a Microsoft E5 license with a lot of security enhancements.

I've only seen it in the implementation and design phase, however, it's pretty good. That said, it's also within the environment of a large company where the processes can be a bit difficult.

I'd advise users to integrate it into their security operations center so that they can have the full benefit of the product.

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

I am using the solution for personal data protection.

The main features of this solution are that it handles everything by itself and is well integrated.

There could be an increase in security for the solution.

I have been using this solution for a couple of years.

The solution has been stable.

In my experience, the solution has been scalable.

There is no license needed, the solution comes with Microsoft Windows.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Defender Antivirus a nine out of ten.