We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"It is a very stable program."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the IPS and the integration with ISE."
"I am told that we get over 100 million emails a month. This filters them down and allows only somewhere about three million emails, which is a great help."
"Its most valuable features are its scalability and advanced threat protection for customers."
"The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this product is that there is a lot more malware slipping through my email filters than I expected."
"The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"We can visualize and control the activities in the environment from anywhere."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."
"The management capabilities, allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks."
"It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else."
"If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"The pricing policy could be more competitive, similar to Cisco's offerings."
"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."
"It cannot currently block URLs over websites."
"They've been having some issues with updating their endpoint agents, and it has been quite frustrating."
"Cortex XDR should have a lightweight agent, and the agent size should not be heavy."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."
"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."
"Impact on system performance is horrible, adding a lot of delays for users."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 9th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 44 reviews while Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4. 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 Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint and Cisco Umbrella, whereas Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Wazuh. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks 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.