We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Cisco Secure Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is commended for its extensive cross-platform protection, user-friendly interface, and compatibility with third-party software. Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for its threat-hunting capabilities, sandboxing, and swift response to attacks. Users also praised the solution's seamless integration with Talos for continuous protection. Kaspersky users requested improvements in security and stability. They also want better documentation, faster malware scanning, enhanced encryption, and improved remote management. Cisco Secure Endpoint could benefit from providing more scenario-based information and a simpler, more customizable main dashboard. Integration with artificial intelligence and IoT is another area for improvement.
Service and Support: Users say that Kaspersky’s support is helpful and responsive, whether it comes from resellers, partners, or the vendor. Users said Cisco support is efficient and responsive, and customers also found it easy to find answers in the documentation without help. Some users recommend enhancing training programs and streamlining management consoles to further enhance the level of support provided.
Ease of Deployment: Some reported that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is straightforward to set up, while others find it more complex and time-consuming. Users generally found Cisco Secure Endpoint easy to set up, but some users reported challenges related to agent behavior and configuration. The initial installation involves downloading an agent and installing it on endpoints, and the total deployment time ranged from a week to several months.
Pricing: Users gave mixed feedback on the price of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. Some found it reasonable while others thought it was expensive. Cisco Secure Endpoint's pricing is seen as fair and reasonable. Some users requested additional discounts, particularly for educational purposes.
ROI: Our reviewers said that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business has proven to be a solid investment. Cisco Secure Endpoint offers cost savings and the potential to earn money by extending services.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business over Cisco Secure Endpoint. Kaspersky provides extensive protection across various platforms and systems, offering features like web filtering, email filtering, and anomaly control. Users find it simple to deploy and use, with high detection rates and minimal impact on system resources. Cisco Secure Endpoint requires improvements in customization and integration.
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"The solution is easy to deploy and applies multi-factor authentication."
"appreciate the File Trajectory feature, as it's excellent for an analyst or mobile analyst. I can track everything that happens on our server from my PC or device. Integration with SecureX is a welcome feature because it connects Cisco's integrated security portfolio with our complete infrastructure. Sandboxing is helpful, and integration with the Cisco environment is excellent as we use many of their products, and that's very valuable for us."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"Secure Endpoint has decreased our time to remediate by providing the tools and the integrations we need so we can quickly look across our entire network, look for those threats, and actually make good decisions."
"Cisco has definitely improved our organization a lot. In terms of business, our company feels safer. We actually switched from legacy signature-based solutions to threat intelligence-based and machine learning-based solutions, which is Cisco Secure. This has improved our security significantly, from 10% of signature-based technology security to 99.9% of the current one which we are running. We were happy."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"The malware threat detection has been excellent overall."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is a strong yet lightweight tool. It allows us to control machines even when disconnected from the network. In offline mode, we can generate passwords and access the system. The policies it offers are robust."
"The antivirus feature is very, very good."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is a very powerful tool for us. We use a lot of third-party software that integrates well with the solution."
"They have a very good reporting system and they have a very good dashboard for the administrator, which makes monitoring everything easy."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the daily updates and protection from virus attacks."
"The setup and implementation are easy."
"We used to have a lot of phishing attacks and all these kind of things for end-users so we decided that we needed endpoint security. We evaluated some solutions and found that Kaspersky is the most appropriate in terms of endpoint security and the speed of the user machine. The encryption is a major factor from our end."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"The solution is not stable."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"We would like to have an API integration with a SIEM solution, because as far as I know, it currently hasn't yet been released."
"It's pretty good as it is, but its cost could be improved."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"In the next release, I would for it to have back up abilities. I would like the ability to go back to a point in time to when my PC was uninfected and to the moment of when the infection happened."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The integration of the Cisco products for security could be better in the sense that not everything is integrated, and they aren't working together. In addition, not all products are multi-tenant, so you can't separate different customer environments from each other, which makes it a little bit hard for a managed service provider to deliver services to the customers."
"Logging could be better in terms of sending more logs to Cisco Firepower or Cisco ASA. That's an area where it could be made better."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"It slows down the system sometimes, and it has the occasional false positive where it deems something a virus when it isn't."
"The solution could improve by having some integration with other vendors."
"We would like it so that if a user uses it on-premises, the server should use fewer hardware resources."
"When we connect to the solutions' website they block out our VPN connection. This causes us some difficulties."
"The solution could be a lot lighter. You really feel it when the laptop starts."
"It should be more secure and detect new malware as it's released."
"It is not very good for the performance of the system, and especially with older devices, it has a noticeable impact."
"I would like to see better-enhanced features, such as protection against ransomware and different types of malicious malware."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 45 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 112 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Makes it possible to see a threat once and block it across all endpoints and your entire security platform". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Cisco Umbrella, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Trend Vision One Endpoint Security. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.