Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs McAfee Complete Data Protection comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Endpoint
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (14th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (12th), Cisco Security Portfolio (6th)
McAfee Complete Data Protec...
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Encryption (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Endpoint Security solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Secure Endpoint is designed for Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) and holds a mindshare of 1.6%, down 2.0% compared to last year.
McAfee Complete Data Protection, on the other hand, focuses on Endpoint Encryption, holds 8.6% mindshare, down 11.0% since last year.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
Endpoint Encryption
 

Featured Reviews

Mark Broughton - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 10, 2022
Tighter integration with Umbrella and Firepower gave us eye-opening information
We were using a third-party help desk. One of the ways that they were fixing problems was to delete the client and then add the client back if there was an issue where the client had stopped communicating. Any improvement in the client communicating back to the server would be good, particularly for machines that are offline for a couple of weeks. A lot of our guys were working on a rotation where the machine might be offline for that long. They were also terrible about rebooting their machines, so those network connections didn't necessarily get refreshed. So, anything that could improve that communication would be good. Also, an easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful. If you could say, "Okay, we've got these two machines. This one says it's not reporting and this one says it's been reporting. Obviously, somebody did a reinstall," it would help. That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number. Not that Cisco was going to come down on you and say, "Oh, you're using too many licenses," right away. But to have a much more accurate license usage count by being able to better dedupe the records would be good. I also sent over a couple of other ideas to our technical rep. A lot of that had to do with the reporting options. It would be really nice to be able to do a lot more in the reporting. You can't really drill down into the reports that are there. The reporting and the need for the documentation to be updated and current would be my two biggest areas of complaint. Also, there was one section when I was playing with the automation where it was asking for the endpoint type rather than the machine name. If I could have just put in the machine name, that would have been great. So there are some opportunities, when it comes to searching, to have more options. If I wanted to search, for example, by a Mac address because, for some reason, I thought there was a duplication and I didn't have the machine name, how could I pull it up with the Mac address? When you're getting to that level, you're really starting to get into the ticky tacky. I would definitely put the reporting and documentation way ahead of that.
ObaseunAwoyinfa - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 26, 2024
Encrypts the hard drive, offers data protection policies and effective part of DLP strategy
The only thing that I think could be improved is the data classifier. It's not a very robust classifier, which is where its limitation lies. For example, you see a lot of higher-end solutions where people can classify data more effectively, adding labels like transcription labels and such. McAfee’s classifier doesn't handle all those tasks. It doesn’t offer the same level of functionality as other data classification tools. You can't do things like fingerprinting and other advanced classification methods. However, if you were to make it more robust, the product could become too heavy to run effectively on endpoints and servers. So, to be honest, I can't think of anything else off the top of my head that could be added. I think it's a great solution as it stands. If anyone wants extended data classification, they can leverage other tools like Titus, Fortra's Classifier Suite (previously known as Boldon James Classifier), or even Microsoft AIP if they have the budget. You can also leverage Trellix to enhance your data protection. From my point of view, McAfee Complete Data Protection is one of the best solutions out there, if not the best, to be honest.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"With Cisco Secure Endpoint, we now have visibility over what is happening on the endpoint side."
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the IPS and the integration with ISE."
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."
"Its most valuable features are its scalability and advanced threat protection for customers."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"In addition, it is easy to use, and you can define rules that protect the database beyond the built-in rules of the product. I found another purpose for the product besides the basic things that it does, protecting the database: privileged use, weak authentication, SQL injection and and database platform vulnerability."
"All of the Complete Data products are valuable."
"It is capable of acting as Web control, Device Control, or Data Control."
"It provides encryption, data protection, and DLP, all under one roof. The deployment, scalability, and reporting is too good. My clients are satisfied with the stability of the product. The solution is highly scalable. The technical support's response time and turnaround time as the solution provider are excellent. The availability of great back-end support and process support makes the product great. The initial setup is straightforward, with simple configurations. I recommend the solution."
"Complete Data Protection lets us define roles in our data products. It helps us identify something suspicious on the client's device."
"The interface is user-friendly and it provides a large number of options."
"The solution is easy to deploy and manage"
"The server software console is exquisitely designed and organized for handy access and manipulation by the administrator."
 

Cons

"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"It cannot currently block URLs over websites."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"Due to the complexity of the technology that is used and its advanced threat detection capabilities, it is possible to encounter many delays in operation."
"In terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"It is an expensive solution."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"There are compatibility issues with the Chrome browser."
"I want simplicity. A new user opening the dashboard will be confused. It needs to be more user-friendly."
"The price could be improved."
"Initial setup was complex."
"In terms of where the solution could improve, it could integrate with network solutions for ADTs, email web gateways and discovery."
"The solution needs more advanced features."
"There are some features that do not work with Mac."
"It is difficult to manage."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"The price is very fair to the customer."
"I rate the pricing a five or six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"You must make monthly payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. There are no extra charges apart from the standard licensing fees associated with the product."
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"Because we do see the value of what it's bringing, I think they have priced it well."
"The pricing is better than that of some competing products."
"The licensing is yearly."
"When it comes to pricing, I've observed an increase recently."
"This solution is reasonably priced."
"The solution is more expensive than one of its competitors."
"The price is good, it's a low-cost solution."
"McAfee Complete Data Protection is a little bit expensive."
"The pricing is quite reasonable compared to other vendors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Secure Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
The solution's price is about the same as that of Palo Alto solutions.
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco Secure Endpoint is an expensive solution.
Would you choose Microsoft BitLocker or McAfee Complete Data Protection?
Microsoft BitLocker is very intuitive and easy to maintain. It is basically the global standard solution for drive encryption and successfully fulfills regulatory needs in terms of data protection....
What do you like most about McAfee Complete Data Protection?
It worked for me: it's easy to use and has been very effective.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Complete Data Protection?
The huge problem I see is pricing. We understand that DLP is not cheap anywhere in the world, but we constantly lose our protection because of pricing. Sometimes, this is because end users prefer t...
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Xcel Energy
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.