We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response and Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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."Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"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 FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"From my point of view, one of the best aspects of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its high detection rate, which surpasses many other solutions. Its valuable features include behavior detection, threat prevention, device control, adaptive anomaly control, and centralized protection detection."
"One of the good features is the provider's Faulting capability. If any of our systems detect malware, we can check the behavior of the malware by sending it to Kaspersky's sandbox environment. This helps us assess how destructive the malware is. After analyzing it, we can create use cases and protection measures based on that behavior. So, this is the best feature of Kaspersky."
"Kaspersky EDR offers automated response capabilities, enhancing efficiency by enabling quick investigation and response to potential threats on Android devices."
"Kaspersky offers more visible and comprehensive features compared to other products."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The product is integrated with endpoint protection. We don't have to implement a separate technology. It provides visibility over the endpoints."
"The advanced detection features are valuable."
"It downloads essential security patches that are valuable for my PC."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"The user-friendliness of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is particularly impressive. Even with basic technical knowledge, users can easily navigate the system, make changes, and implement updates."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Detections could be improved."
"The support needs improvement."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"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."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response needs vast resources on the central node. Not all maintenance tasks are in the GUI, so we often use commands. The lack of documentation for these processes means we frequently reach out to support, open tickets, and run complex CLI commands. It's not the most straightforward process. It should also improve stability."
"The main issue was compatibility with the cloud itself. The CPU usage immediately spiked, causing the machines to hang and sometimes even forcing server or computer restarts."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is expensive. It should improve its stability."
"There is room for improvement in the support."
"My team was struggling with the reporting when we were doing an audit. The console features are a little more interactive and user-friendly. There's some issue, or maybe some fixing has to be done."
"Incorporating an AI protection tool with the capability to detect and prevent zero-day threats, particularly those with a five-star rating in terms of severity would be beneficial."
"Kaspersky EDR could be improved by adding network detection capabilities to enhance convenience and security."
"There is room for improvement in its user interface."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"There are a few areas for improvement. We have encountered licensing issues on occasion, and sometimes updates don't apply properly."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"It would be much more convenient if the migration tool could be installed directly on the customer's VMs, enabling a smoother migration process to the new infrastructure, with potential restrictions addressed accordingly."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 24th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 16 reviews while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is ranked 30th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 8.0, while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Provides the ability to send detected malware to Kaspersky's sandbox environment for behavioral analysis". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor Endpoint Secure writes "Provides a unified and multi-layer security solution". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Sangfor Endpoint Secure is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Open EDR, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Trend Micro Apex One. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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.