We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and Logpoint 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 made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"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."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"We like the user and entity behaviour analytics (UEBA) and find it valuable."
"The most valuable feature of LogPoint is that they have the SIEM and SOAR combined in one solution. They are not on a separate platform."
"They basically charge you in a better way."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is the combination of the software and the support that they have."
"Technical support is responsive and very friendly."
"What I like best about LogPoint is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions. LogPoint also has better dashboards which I find valuable. I also like that you can create use cases based on your assets."
"The most beneficial was being able to prove, with proper reports, that from a compliance perspective, the company is in control. The service part of LogPoint did modifications or did some additional work to have the proper reports defined."
"The most valuable features are the ones that we use the most, which are the search and report facilities."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"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 solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"Detections could be improved."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"I know that they have user behavior analytics, but it's an extra cost for this feature. It would be nice if it was in with the standard products."
"One of the things we faced last year was that we had some memory issues with the server running. We were running them as virtual services, and we were facing some performance issues. Back then, there were some things that had already been solved at the end, but one of the small issues we had was that it was quite memory-consuming. After one upgrade that we did, we faced some performance issues."
"One of the downsides is it is not a SaaS solution. It must be on-premises."
"The interface needs things like wizards that will assist with creating complex correlation rules."
"Dashboards could be developed further."
"The solution should offer more integrations and third-party solutions like incident response platforms or allow access to third-party big data"
"It is complicated to collect daily logs from other systems."
"Logpoint is not flexible. Its documentation is not user-friendly."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 36th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 19 reviews while Logpoint is ranked 39th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 20 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while Logpoint is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Logpoint writes "Good technical support but it is complex to use and resource-heavy". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas Logpoint is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Rapid7 InsightIDR, Microsoft Sentinel and Wazuh. See our Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Logpoint 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.