We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert 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."Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The stability is very good."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"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 product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"It has been scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"The solution does a good job of filtering and blocking unusual traffic."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky EDR is its simplicity. The console is easy to use and not very complex."
"Its customer service is quite good."
"Kaspersky is easy to use, and it performs well."
"The most valuable feature is endpoint protection."
"The product has an easy-to-use EDR module based on signature-based antivirus detection. It is a complete software."
"Has some great features not available elsewhere."
"EDR's most valuable feature is its basic protection from malware and viruses."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pros →
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"Kaspersky needs to strengthen its standing in the market."
"The solution can improve by providing automatic fixing of vulnerabilities and reducing the resources used in the server component and endpoint agent. They are very bulky and use a lot of CPU, memory, and hard drive resources."
"The product should release more frequent updates. The tool needs to improve its scalability as well."
"The solution does not offer much support to its users in Spanish, so I would like to see them offer more support in Spanish."
"It is not easy to follow the kill chain of a potential infection or malware."
"Could include some additional protection."
"They should include XDR features in the solution."
"The technical support team should respond in a more timely manner."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Cons →
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pricing and Cost Advice →
Digital Guardian is ranked 28th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 11 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert writes "Solid security and performance; overall a useful tool". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is most compared with Trend Vision One, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cynet, IBM Security QRadar and Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response. See our Digital Guardian vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert 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.