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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Deep Instinct Prevention Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
45th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (34th)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
43rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.0%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

AtulChaurasia - PeerSpot reviewer
Scalable platform with intuitive features for detecting malicious files
The initial setup process is straightforward. We have to install the agent, create a package, and deploy it on servers. It has a prebuilt console managed by the cloud team of Cybereason. We don't have to worry about the console and concentrate on endpoint implementation. It takes ten days to deploy it on 10,000 devices.
Aaron Branson - PeerSpot reviewer
Bolsters prevention with great detection and response capabilities
Due to the nature of deep learning, it’s sometimes difficult to determine why the AI model has blocked a specific file, although this has improved over time. The downside of its intelligence and automation is we could use more logging details of what happened behind the scenes. Enhancements for multi-tenant use cases will be a plus as we scale up usage. We're able to work around it within our own multi-tenant XDR platform, but the improved delineation of parties within an instance is beneficial. Continuous improvement to the admin UI naturally will help improve the experience and allow us to work faster. Sometimes it can be chalked up to training, however, great UX makes a big difference in saving time. Wider Linux flavors coverage also would be a plus.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"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."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"Cybereason absolutely enables us to mitigate and isolate on the fly. Our managed detection response telemetry has dropped dramatically since we began using it. It's very top-of-mind. We were running some tabletop exercises and none of the detections were getting triggered by the managed security services provider. So we needed to find a solution that would trigger high-fidelity alerts. That was Cybereason and it dramatically changed our landscape from the detection and response perspective."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"When we were looking at Carbon Black and Sophos, the prevention pieces weren't as strong when compared to DI, which is why we decided to go with DI... I would rather have a product that does the prevention up front and saves me the effort of having to wipe someone's workstation."
"Deep Instinct's detection rate is close to 100 percent."
"Deep Instinct complements the solutions we already have. You don't need to rip and replace any antivirus or endpoint that you have. It's easy to use and it's easy to have it side-by-side with other solutions. That makes it really easy to have an additional level of protection, rather than to hassle with doing solution migration."
"The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"It's just a single agent that has everything in it... With the EDR solutions, you have to install it, then you have another service history installed, and you have behavioral analytics, etc. With this, everything is in a single small "box," a small agent that has pretty much got everything."
 

Cons

"They need to improve their technical support services."
"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."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"There is room for improvement in the product features related to device control, particularly USB management."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"I would like a little more training for the admins."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"It would be nice if there were options where, if I have to do SIEM integration, I could do so from the UI: Just pick and choose what SIEM solutions the customers use and have options to have out-of-the-box connection facility."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"The pricing is manageable."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"In comparison to the other products out there, it's exceptionally competitively priced. When you consider the lower administrative overhead that it facilitates, it's an absolute value."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
We use the product for enhancing security postures by leveraging behavioral analytics and security engines effectively minimizing false positives and detecting threats.
What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in th...
 

Also Known As

Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.