We performed a comparison between HP Wolf Security and Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"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."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The stability is very good."
"This is stable and scalable."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"It has prevented thousands of potential threats by encapsulating them within its own vSentry container, thus providing overall protection and integrity of the operating system."
"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack. We continue to have less user impact through a significantly reduced amount of malware infections. It's become a non-event."
"The isolation feature is the most important because it prevents attacks."
"The most valuable feature is the process isolation because it simply stops malware from infecting the machines."
"We've been able to isolate and prevent malicious code from external email attachments and from downloaded internet files. Those are the two big areas that have really made an impact."
"I use HP Wolf Security to add a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments."
"Now, instead of us having to go through that analysis, they actually give us a monthly report that shows us: "Here's what you got hit with, here's what would have happened, here are the forensics behind the attack," and, obviously, Bromium stopped it."
"The feature that stands out the most is that when someone clicks on a link in an email... [if] that link is malicious and it has some malware or keylogger attached to it, when it opens up in that Bromium virtualized browser, there's no chance of it actually being on the machine and running, because as soon as they click that "X" in the upper right-hand side of the browser, everything just vanishes. That is an added plus."
"Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform is stable and runs all the time."
"The most valuable use is detailing metadata collection from the endpoint and network."
"I feel the anti-ransomware update is one of the tool's valuable features."
"The solution is very easy to use. Its interface is very simple, and you can build IOC's indicators. You can use your rules to detect these attacks because you can leverage threat intelligence. Y"
"The email security feature is really good."
"Detections could be improved."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Reporting is one of the shortcomings of the product. We do mine the data that's in there from a forensics perspective... It becomes very difficult because you have to spend a lot of time digging through the volumes of data. Reporting is absolutely the biggest shortcoming."
"Room for improvement would be keeping up with the rate of change, specifically on Windows platforms. There are a lot of updates that come out for Microsoft Windows operating systems and the Bromium product needs to be able to keep up quickly with those updates and all the browser updates that are coming out. It's hard to do, but that's really where they need to be more responsive because we end up with problems and then we have to call support to get patches, etc."
"After a major release, there's always a lot of "dust settling." You have to work through all those issues and then you're fine for a while. The problem is, it's stable, it's fine, until the next major release comes out. Then you go back into the cycle again of uncertainty, instability, working through issues until they have patched and remediated all the problems that you're having. It's not unlike any other vendor though"
"Initial setup was complex. There were many configurations that needed to be worked out with the vendor. The setup required hands-on assistance from Bromium."
"Initially, when we came in contact with Bromium a few years ago, it had a nice threat analyst, or a LAVA Pop, which is what they used to call it. Once it detected malware, it would show us the malware's path... I don't see that on the computers now. We only get to see that in the console. I would like to still see that on the individual machines because when we go out to look at a machine, we don't necessarily have access to the console."
"The tool behaves differently when I ported to Windows 11."
"They have always struggled with usability. The protection that it offers you is tremendous, but there's definitely an impact with use of resources on the computer. It's gotten a lot better now with Win 10. But sometimes, when you open up a website, it's going to take longer than it would without Bromium, and it's the same with documents."
"I did not find this to be an out-of-the-box solution, it required planning and alignment across many groups."
"Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform is not a good product. We had problems with endpoints and the solution did not detect it. We didn't get any alerts about the attack."
"The backup and recovery features of the product are not good."
"The solution lacks cloud integrations."
"The blind spot or gap in the platform is network analysis functionality."
"In some of the places I have come across, even though they use Kaspersky, the ransomware enters their system."
More Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
HP Wolf Security is ranked 47th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 8 reviews while Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform is ranked 53rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 5 reviews. HP Wolf Security is rated 7.8, while Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of HP Wolf Security writes "Adds a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform writes "The tool provides excellent sandboxing and email security features, but the backup and recovery features are not good". HP Wolf Security is most compared with Norton Small Business, Bitdefender Total Security, Microsoft Defender for Business, Kaspersky Total Security and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform is most compared with Darktrace and Trend Vision One. See our HP Wolf Security vs. Kaspersky Anti-Targeted Attack Platform report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.