We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response 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."The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"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."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"One thing that I like about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it is detecting all the suspicious or malicious binaries, and it has integration with Palo Alto Firewall."
"Cortex XDR can integrate the firewalls and determine the tendencies of the attacks. It's a new generation antivirus, with protection endpoints and detection response. It is very easy to use and everybody can operate the solution."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."
"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"I use the solution to protect our infrastructure. The tool has special frames for banking. There is an additional secure filter for banking-related pages. It protects me from viruses, malware, and attacks."
"The product is stable."
"WithSecure includes an encrypted drive that stores a key for accessing the encrypted data."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The only issue that we have today is with false positives. We have too many false positives with the solution."
"It offers good scalability."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Pros →
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The support needs improvement."
"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized."
"I would like to see some additional features related to email protection included."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"It would be good to have a better way to search for a file within the UI."
"Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"There's an overall lack of features."
"Its automated functionality could be better."
"The tool’s mobile version needs to be improved."
"The website rules are too complicated."
"The monthly reporting feature of WithSecure can be improved."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is scalable. My company has 800-1000 customers."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Cons →
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 32nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Has an additional secure filter for banking-related pages and protects from viruses, malware, and attacks". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Vision One, Elastic Security and Cynet. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response 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.