We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"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."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"The solution is efficient."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"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."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"It's free. There is no additional cost. It's part of Windows."
"The main features of this solution are that it handles everything by itself and is well integrated."
"The whole bundle of the product, which is similar to other Microsoft products, is valuable. Ten years ago, you had third-party stuff for different things. You had one solution for email archiving and another third-party one for something else. Nowadays, Microsoft Office covers all the stuff that was formerly covered by third-party solutions. It is the same with antivirus. The functionality is just basic. You have the scanning, and then you also have a kind of cloud-based protection and reporting about your environment. With Microsoft Security Center, you have a complete overview of your environment. You know the software inventory, and you have security recommendations. You can not only see that the antivirus is up to date; you can also see where are the vulnerabilities in your system. Microsoft Security Center tells you where you have old, deprecated software and what kind of CVEs are addressed. It's really cool stuff."
"It's pretty easy to scale."
"The EDR feature is most valuable."
"Provides good vulnerability assessment."
"Defender is stable. The performance is good."
"I like the simplicity of the portal and the integration with Microsoft Intune. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easy to use and implement."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"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."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"Localization is always a challenge, especially with new products you typically want. Solutions are designed to be deployed where the most licenses are being consumed, such as in the United States. They focus on US products, devices, and networks. Specialized deployments for other countries would allow for a smoother experience in transition."
"This solution is not secure, which is why I have moved to Linux."
"I think Microsoft needs to improve some of the security aspects of Defender. The email part, in particular, needs to be improved in terms of security effectiveness."
"Its detection is not as quick. There should also be more frequent updates."
"Lowering the price would be an improvement."
"My main issue with the tool is that there are too many menus. This causes a steep learning curve for those without training or unfamiliar with Defender for Endpoint. From an end-user perspective, the solution is there on the machine and does its job; it works seamlessly. However, as a security professional dealing with it behind the scenes, the learning curve can be steep, but not too steep. Still, it has taken some of my analysts up to a month to get familiar with the product."
"I would like to see fewer pop messages and alerts."
"I had some cases a while back and told an agent my issue. When I called the next day, I had to explain everything again to a different person, so I found it annoying to repeat myself all over."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 44th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. 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 Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.