Panda Adaptive Defense 360 Reviews

We can replace one appliance solution with Panda Security Adaptive Defense.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its device control.

Panda Security Adaptive Defense’s stability could be improved.

I have been using Panda Security Adaptive Defense for one year.

Panda Security Adaptive Defense is a stable solution. I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

I rate Panda Security Adaptive Defense ten out of ten for scalability.

The initial setup of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is not complex. It's very easy.

The solution's deployment time depends on the dimension of the client and the number of licenses the customer wants to have. For example, it takes less than one hour to deploy ten licenses.

Customers need to pay monthly licensing costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense, which is not expensive.

Panda Security Adaptive Defense is deployed on the cloud. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate Panda Security Adaptive Defense nine out of ten.

We have five licenses for internal use, not for sale. For other users, we utilize demonstration licenses or organization licenses.

Firstly, we can manage it on the cloud. Secondly, we have control over our devices, specifically USB ports, allowing us to block or control the traffic. In cases where clients cannot afford a Firebox, they can use Panda Security as a cost-effective solution to protect their devices. It enables widespread usage.

As for areas of improvement, there is always room for enhancement. The stability could be improved. Both me and my teammates who use Panda Security have experienced some issues.

I have been working with this solution for five months. 

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability of Panda Security Adaptive Defense nine out of ten. 

Panda Security is a comprehensive security solution because it includes a firewall.

At the moment, there are 20 users using this solution. It is regularly used. Moreover, we do have plans to increase its usage.

The customer service and support team is good. We like the support. 

We have a team of four for deployments and maintenance. We have two administrators and two support members who provide guidance on usage.

I had to make a technical call to implement this solution for the clients. It has been a part of my daily work ever since. Currently, I am providing training to my teammates on how to set it up internally and for clients. 

Some clients initially prefer a demonstration before committing to payment. In such cases, we create a client profile and provide a demonstration license for a month. We use it during that period.

As for licensing costs, we pay for a yearly license. It is an expensive licensing. 

In Africa, we suffer attacks all the time. It's an everyday need. We need to protect our devices and our information from these attacks. In terms of recommendations, I would suggest using Panda Security to protect computers against these and other types of attacks. 

Many people initially struggle with licensing costs, and some resort to open-source solutions. However, when they experience an attack, they realize the importance of using a commercial license. 

We recently discussed the issue of device protection during a session where Panda Security was recommended. Many people have shown interest in the solution, and we are waiting for feedback. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Panda Security as a ten. 

We're primarily using the solution for security purposes. It is for software and malware blocking, URL blocking, and executables. We use it to monitor PCs to check for threats and updates, et cetera. It helps with endpoint protection.

The solution makes it easy to unblock software. 

I like the way they show inventory and the serial number of devices. 

The initial setup is very straightforward.

It is stable, and the performance is good.

It is scalable.

The cost is not too high. 

It would help if it would monitor the network better and offer email protection for better monitoring. 

I've used the solution for one and a half years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's very trustworthy. The performance is quite good. It's updated well. 

It is easy to give access to people who need to see the admin panel from their PC.

I'd rate the stability eight out of ten.

It is scalable. You can make groups or divide the company departments and add specific rules to each. It's simple.

We have about 100 users at this time. At this time, we do not have plans to increase usage. 

We've never used technical support. 

It is easy to set up the solution. It's not overly complex. 

It took maybe a week to deploy it to the whole company.

We were able to deploy it through email or the Active Directory. It can also be installed manually. The setup is flexible. 

You only need one or two people to deploy and maintain the solution. We have engineers that can handle these tasks. 

We handled the setup in-house. We did not need any outside assistance. 

I have not evaluated the ROI. However, it is worth to cost of the product.

You do need to pay for a license to use the solution. However, I do not know the exact cost. My understanding is it is not expensive. 

I did not previously evaluate other options. 

We're using the latest version of the solution. 

There may be better solutions; however, for now, we use this.

I'd advise new users to first know the rules they wish to implement before doing the full deployment.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is security protection as anti-virus software.

The dashboard management feature is valuable.

The solution should have additional endpoint protection.

We have been using the solution for approximately one year.

The solution is scalable, and the entire company uses it.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support.

We previously used Symantec. However, we switched because some of our operating systems were becoming older, and we needed to find something to keep us in those older devices.

The initial setup is easy.

We implemented it in-house, and it took approximately 20 minutes per machine. So we did not require many people for deployment.

I rate the licensing costs an eight out of ten.

We evaluated Sophos.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. I recommend this solution to users looking for something economical to cover most of their bases.

The protection from malware is the most important feature. It has some endpoint information about the vehicle of the virus, malware, etc. It is also stable and easy to install, and they also provide good technical support.

It needs some improvements in the DNS security feature. Currently, it does not have full DNS security. It only has semi-DNS security, which can be improved. It is an important feature for us, and it would be really good if they can improve the DNS security feature. 

Our group has some plans to change to Cisco AMP, which has features such as DNS, Umbrella. We are trying to learn about Cisco AMP and compare it with Panda.

I have been using this solution for around three years. We are using its latest version.

It has been stable until now.

It is scalable.

They provide good technical support. They are able to resolve our issues.

It is easier than other endpoint protection solutions. The installation takes around 5 to 10 minutes, but we need to wait for a bit to connect to the cloud. It takes more than a day to set it up for a new company because it involves setting up security and policies.

I implemented it in my current company. I had also implemented it in my previous company.

I would recommend this solution for endpoint protection for other companies. We didn't have any major security issues.

I would rate Panda Security Adaptive Defense a nine out of ten.

It's very easy to deploy, we don't have any problem or issues with it. It's almost full automatic. It basically makes the assumption that everything is supposed to be suspicious; files, processes, URL accesses, and so on. Everything is checked once in the cloud and it's assessed as malware or safe. You're free to use it. It's simple enough to be used by a non-specialist, by regular users. You don't need a large security team to manage it. 

The gap between the two final conclusions is a problem, whether or not a file is known to be malware or is known to be safe. There is a gap between this space which means that some time in which the attestation service works on the conclusion it might regenerate this gap through the communication process. For example, if an employee gets his laptop and goes somewhere where it doesn't have full access to Panda Cloud, meaning the attestation service in the Panda Cloud, it will lose the connection and it cannot promptly receive the attestation conclusion.

If you travel or something like that or there's a lapse in time in which the lack of the conclusion regarding a required item like a file or process or whatever, is lacking. Panda understood it might be a huge problem for the whole solution. They resolved it in a way that I don't like. They assumed that there is a knowledgeable person in the customer security team that will assume the conclusion and will either set that everything is supposed to be malware or everything is supposed to be safe, unless it's attested by the Panda Cloud. There are just these two options. You have a checkbox and you just check or uncheck the checkbox, meaning you assume that the non-attested item is assumed to be malware. If you put the checkmark, it is assumed to be safe. Either conclusion means we will have either false positives or false negatives. This is an issue they didn’t solve well.

They didn't solve this issue well first of all because it is only a single checkbox to do this. As a suggestion, they could use several similar checkboxes, for example, one for executable files, one for malware detections or suspicions, and so on. You either treat unattested items as malware or either as safe items, which is not good.

I have been using Panda Security Adaptive Defense for fourteen months.

I haven't had any crashes. I recall having some issues deploying agents on Linux distributions, but I don't recall which distributions. It is possible that they have some issues there. The way they distributed agents seems like they rebuilt some packages and then activated them into the OS, which is not a good way of distributing software. It requires a specific set of libraries and OS modules. If your distribution doesn't have it, it might end in an installment crash on that endpoint. 

Stability depends on the networking because getting network connectivity interruptions on the endpoints breaks the continuous state of the security.

It is good for small and medium-sized companies. 

They have a lot of support sites. I haven't need to contact them for support.

It is remarkably easy to deploy. 

The time it takes to deploy depends on the customer infrastructure of course. I think a medium 1000 endpoint infrastructure could take around one day. You can use the group policy if you integrate with a local domain or something. They provide several tools to deploy it. It's nice.

The amount of people required to deploy depends on the complexity of the infrastructure. If you have branch offices or sub-networks distributed regionally or geographically, you probably will need more than one person.

If you have Active Directory across multi-domain distribution and so on, your team should be more than one person. For smaller customers, I assume one well-trained security person could do the work in one day.

The attestation paradigm is specific to Panda. I haven't found it anywhere else as strongly enforced into the solution.

My advice would be to follow the general rules, do a trial, learn about it well. Test it in a test environment, change the settings according to your customer-specific needs, and then implement it if you find it has advantages.

In the next release, I would like for them to add DDR features, threat intelligence, and more analytics. It lacks in that area. It should be integrated better with CMS and other useful enterprise applications and tools.

Threat intel also needs improvement. If I was a security analyst, employed in a company and my boss asked me what I think about this solution, the first place I’d look is where the threat intel is. It just lacks this. It is well hidden in cloud attestation service.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

We are a system integrator and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

We set up Panda Security Adaptive Defense for endpoint protection.

Since implementing this solution, we have not had any trouble with malware.

The most valuable feature is the web filter application control.

This solution is very easy to implement.

The granularity of security is very good because we can create different groups that are categorized, for example, by the department. There are policies in place to assist with this.

The reports are good and help us to better manage our system.

The Linux installation is performed on the command line and they need a package installer for that operating system.

We have been working with Panada Security for six months.

This solution is stable, at least for now. We haven't experienced any issues or received any reports that the endpoint has crashed or it is missing from the network. Overall, it seems to be performing well and is always functioning.

I think that Panda Security is scalable because you just need to install the package and it will adapt. You can perform cloud-based management. You can add as many subscriptions as you need to.

Our clients are in the banking industry and one of them has about 50 branches. They initially purchased about 500 licenses from us and they also have a corporate team that has another 300 licenses.

I have not contacted technical support by telephone or email. When I have run into problems, I just performed a Google search and used the knowledge base. That was enough to solve our problems.

I have also worked with Sophos. It is a better solution but Panada Security is more economical and the feature set is good.

It is hard to install and deploy on a Linux operating system.

We implement this solution for our clients and train them with the knowledge required to manage and use it.

The licensing is subscription-based and priced well compared to other endpoint security solutions. The price is good for the functionality that it provides.

In general, this product is performing to our expectations. Of course, the best thing to do if you're going to purchase any product is to do a proof of concept first. There are limitations with any software but based on our experience, we are happy with Panda Security Adaptive Defense. That said, it is not perfect.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

This solution is used to assist cybersecurity.

This solution has different modules.

The most valuable module is antivirus, which has a whitelist mode that will block everything other than approved transactions. This gives us the ability to define different profiles in terms of the level of protection.

The patch management module is very important.

The systems management module, which can be used for asset inventory and for remote support, is very good.

This solution can scan the entire network and discover all of the systems where it is not installed.

Improvements could be made in terms of how the reporting is structured.

We have been dealing with Panda Security Adaptive Defense for about two years.

My clients have not told me about any trouble with stability.

I have not had any feedback about scalability.

Technical support is always available and I work with them a lot. They are excellent.

I have not sold security solutions other than what is offered by Panda. However, I have personally worked with tools such as Kaspersky. The main difference with Panda is that it uses goodware instead of malware. All other antivirus solutions block know viruses using their definitions, whereas Panda, on the other hand, allows known software and applications and blocks everything else.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing.

This is a very good product. It may feel that it is a bit more expensive but in my experience, it is easily worth it. The core functionality of the product is very impressive and I recommend that people use it. That said, there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.