We performed a comparison between Cynet and Intercept X Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Cynet offers strong ransomware protection and an intuitive interface. Cynet needs to expand device support and add customization options. Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Users suggest improving network monitoring and strengthening integration with other tools. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures.
Service and Support: Cynet's customer service is consistently lauded for its excellence. Their dedicated support team is available around the clock, and they also have a contingency plan for urgent incidents. Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness.
Ease of Deployment: Cynet’s setup is highly efficient, with the ability to configure thousands of devices quickly. Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation.
Pricing: Customers generally think Cynet is affordable and a good value for its features. Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale.
ROI: Cynet yields an excellent ROI by preventing cyberattacks and safeguarding sensitive data. Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Cynet over Intercept X Endpoint. Cynet offers a tailored experience, regular automatic updates, and a user-friendly dashboard equipped with advanced protection capabilities. The solution goes the extra mile with its sophisticated ransomware defense and complimentary 24/7 SOC service. While Intercept X Endpoint also offers solid threat protection, Cynet's customization options and comprehensive cybersecurity approach make it the top choice.
"Having a single pane of glass for all Microsoft security services makes everything much easier. A security analyst can go to a single portal and see everything in one view. The integration of everything into one portal is a huge benefit."
"The ability to isolate and address viruses is the most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender XDR."
"Microsoft Defender's most critical component is its CASB solution. It has many built-in policies that can improve your organization's cloud security posture. It's effective regardless of where your users are, which is critical because most users are working from home. It's cloud-based, so nothing is on-premise."
"The EDR and the way it automatically responds to ransomware and other attacks are valuable features."
"The most valuable feature depends on the scenario. For compliance, I like Microsoft Purview Information Protection and Data Loss Prevention. Sentinel is the most helpful feature for security. 365 Defender helps us prioritize threats across an enterprise. It's a crucial feature for the managed services team."
"I like how Microsoft XDR and the other Microsoft products are integrated into a single unified security stack covering identity access management, endpoint protection, email, cloud applications, etc."
"I like Defender XDR's automation capabilities. XDR isn't automated by default, but you can automate it to respond. If an attack is performed anywhere within the organization, you can isolate that instance from the network. This is what I can figure out for it. When integrated with Sentinel, you can set up playbooks to automate all the alerts gathered on Sentinel from different Microsoft solutions. Sentinel has a wider range of capabilities than XDR."
"The integration with other Microsoft solutions is the most valuable feature."
"A reliable security system that automatically quarantines anything suspicious."
"Cynet is unique in that it has almost everything included and it was built up from the ground, instead of a bundle of purchased and composed modules. It gives you easier very good visibility than Sentinel One as well as a lower maintenance burden."
"If some unusual activity happens on the network, such as I open administrator sessions in a short duration of an hour on many computers in the lab, it sends me an alert about my network saying that one user opened three, four, or five sessions in one hour. Similarly, if I try to play with the disk size on a computer, it will send me an alert, and it will also stop the operation."
"The initial setup is simple and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the monitored support behind it."
"Cynet's most valuable features are laptop and server performance, internal network monitoring, and external firewall lock management."
"I have found the continued support and pretty much all the features to be valuable. They all stand out as being positive. It continues to detect unusual activity when it's supposed to, and so far we haven't had any issues."
"We are very satisfied with the level of performance we get."
"The package we use also comes with spam filtering features, which are quite useful."
"Intercept X helps with internal alerts, application access, and triggering support teams."
"Sophos Intercept X is a complete endpoint solution."
"The updates and a lot of the day-to-day fiddling that you would have to do with it, can all be done from the cloud so it's easy to manage, and very easy to administer."
"The most valuable feature is the CryptoGuard in Sophos. In a case of a ransomware attack, this feature comes into action to protect us."
"A valuable feature offered by Sophos is called Naked Security, and it entails the control managed by the firewall on the site regarding the desktop client interfacing with our cloud client."
"The security on offer is pretty good. We are happy with it."
"It's a good antivirus software and has a lot of features. It now integrates with their on-premises firewall, which is perfect."
"Support is hit or miss. Microsoft wants you to buy premium support contracts. Though they call themselves professional support, it's almost like throwing questions into a black hole. You get an answer, but it's never helpful."
"The solution could improve by having better machine learning and AI. Additionally, the interface, documentation, and integration could be better."
"There is definitely scope for improvement in the automation area. Because the solution is a SaaS platform, we don't have the overall ability to automate stuff.... There is no direct way to go ahead because it's a SaaS platform."
"365 Defender has multiple subsets, including Defender for Cloud Apps. When integrating Defender for Cloud Apps with apps on third-party cloud platforms like AWS or GCP, there are limitations on our ability to control user activities. If Microsoft added more control over third-party products, that would be a game-changer and help us quite a lot."
"There could be a way to proactively monitor unusual activity ."
"Advanced attacks could use an improvement."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"I would like more of the features in Defender for 365 to be included in the smaller licenses. Even if I buy a small license and don't need everything, security shouldn't be a question. Security is one of the main aspects of all projects from our side, so it would be nice to have more features in the smaller licenses."
"They have automated response capability, and they're moving more and more into SOAR capability. They have built-in deception technology with host-file users, phantoms, etc. We used to call them honeypots. So, they're on target. They're doing a really good job, and they should continue to improve with SOAR."
"Management of the console could be simplified and made more user-friendly because right now it's not very easy to use."
"They have some things in the pipeline, we understand, and they're going to be able to support Android and all these other devices soon. The key is the devices - which is an aspect that is lacking right now. Every company has that problem, not just Cynet."
"Sometimes, it is necessary for me to make important changes to a hard drive of a computer, and because Cynet does not allow me to do that, I have to go to the console and remove the computer from the security group just for Cynet. After that, I have to wait for 10 or 15 minutes for that to take effect. I would like to be able to disable Cynet locally. I shouldn’t have to go to the console to find the PC and then take it out of the group and then add it again to the group. I should locally be able to disable Cynet on a computer with a password or something like that, but it is currently not possible."
"I cannot provide more details about Cynet's automation features. While Cynet claims to be automated, the specifics of this automation are unclear. They claim to have a high capability to detect and block attacks, but I am cautious about companies that claim to solve every problem without limitations. It does help in identifying malware on the network but doesn't specifically identify vulnerabilities."
"In future releases, I would like to see cloud security aspects included."
"I would like to see more emphasis on building the data lake and storing all endpoint data in the enterprise data lake so that data mining can be performed"
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the usability of this product for new threats. Meaning, not everything which is new is properly seen by the product and not all the required actions are taken."
"The product defends very well on its own but could possibly use enhancement in giving users more controls."
"The price of this solution can be improved."
"Better protection in the endpoint, server, and mobile is needed."
"The tool is not stable on Linux systems."
"It would be better if it can automatically generate a report for each and every user so that the users get to know the things that shouldn't be accessed from their PCs. It can have information about malicious and non-malicious sites so users are aware of them, and they don't access malicious websites. Such reports can be generated at the end of the day. We should also be able to get through to their support team quickly. Currently, it takes more than half an hour to get through to a technical person."
"We've had difficulty with uninstalling the solution. When we try to uninstall an old version of the basic Sophos Antivirus, it doesn't seem to uninstall completely."
"When I use a proxy, I can bypass Sophos, which is an area that needs improvement."
"The deployment part needs to be improved."
Cynet is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 35 reviews while Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Cynet vs. Intercept X Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors, best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.