ESET Endpoint Protection Platform Reviews

I use the solution primarily for endpoint security. In Bangladesh, I can choose the immediate endpoint security that I've installed for the channel. I went for online protection.

The protection on offer is good.

The solution allows for data encryption, which is helpful. 

The pricing is good.

The solution is scalable.

The stability has been decent.

While we see dangers within our security system, it would help if there were popups that could immediately alert us or the user of the endpoint that something was detected. That way, you have an immediate warning and have to think about if you want to continue what you are doing or not. Right now, it's too slow to react, rather, allows us to react too slowly.

The performance could be better.

I've been working with the solution for the last couple of months. It hasn't been that long just yet.

Aside from not having immediate alerts to potential dangers, the solution is stable. 

The solution can scale just fine.

Right now, the use is limited. We've only had it for a few months.

Currently, we're not using any technical support. Although we might in the future, I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are right now. I've never contacted them.

The pricing of the product is fair. We don't find it to be overly expensive or unreasonable. 

I've tried other endpoint security trials and have found ESET to be superior. 

I'm just a customer and an end-user. I don't have a business relationship with ESET.

At this time, I only have it on my workstation.

The product is good for most endpoints, including laptops and desktops and works well with iOS and Windows systems. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I've been happy with the results I've gotten so far. 

We are customers and resellers of ESET. 

We use all the features that ESET offers, and I particularly like the endpoint feature. 

We are constantly facing new threats and if ESET could incorporate an implementable feature that wouldn't require us to buy an additional product to protect the endpoint, that would be very good. 

I've been using this solution for almost four years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable, we've implemented it in every workstation in the company. We have close to 350 licenses. We have just one person dealing with maintenance, the solution updates every day from the internet. Any new upgrades self-implement. 

Our administrator is usually the one that has contact with technical support. We can email them when necessary and we have a good relationship with them. It's very good for us.

We previously used a different endpoint solution but I don't remember the name. We switched for two reasons. Firstly, in the previous solution, the implementation of the different versions to the endpoint was a little complicated. And secondly, the price. ESET is a more reasonably priced solution for us. 

I know that Cisco also has good endpoint products and it's something we would evaluate and consider. We'd like to see if it can be implemented in our company.

It's important to read all the documentation as it will make implementation easier.  

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We use the solution for endpoint protection.

The solution is very stable and efficient in detecting viruses.

They should make the solution's initial setup process easier. 

We have been using the solution for more than one year.

I rate its stability as a ten.

We have 2,000 solution users in our organization. I rate its scalability as a ten.

The solution's customer service is good.

We used McAfee and Defender previously. We switched to ESET for its cost and functionality.

The solution's initial setup process has a medium complexity. It takes two weeks to deploy it.

Our team of two engineers deploys and maintains the solution in-house.

The solution's license is moderately priced. We purchase its yearly subscription.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as a ten.

We use ESET to scan servers and endpoints. 

I have used ESET for around 10 years. 

Endpoint Security is stable. 

Endpoint Security is scalable. 

It's hard to get support for ESET in Hong Kong and China. There's a number to call that goes nowhere. You can upgrade to the premium service, but there are a few restrictions. 

I rate ESET Endpoint Security eight out of 10 for ease of setup. Setting up ESET can be straightforward or complicated depending on the customer's environment. The deployment time varies, but it's typically around five days. We have a team of four or five people involved in the deployment. Only one person is needed for maintenance. The only maintenance is adjusting the configuration of the dashboard.  

I rate ESET Endpoint Security nine out of 10. 

I am using ESET Endpoint Security mainly for endpoint protection.

The most valuable feature of ESET Endpoint Security is that it is light on resources. It has a very low impact on the system. It uses low memory and the setup size is very low.

I have been using ESET Endpoint Security for approximately five years.

ESET Endpoint Security is highly stable.

I rate the stability of ESET Endpoint Security a five out of five.

The scalability of ESET Endpoint Security is good. If customers want to add more licensing, they can increase them.

We have approximately 45 people using the solution at all levels in my company.

I rate the scalability of ESET Endpoint Security a five out of five.

The support is good ESET Endpoint Security. My engineers on occasion find the information they need online.

I was previously using Seqrite. Our internal team has done POC for ESET Endpoint Security and found many positive points. It was for an international company and the migration was simple.

After we did the initial setup of ESET Endpoint Security, we had to inform users about popups. This solution comes with an in-built software firewall and there can be some popups coming. We must tell the user not to keep, allow, or block anything. That is the main issue on the user side we have faced. The user's experience may not be as good.

We did the implementation of ESET Endpoint Security which took approximately  10 minutes to complete per system with two engineers.

ESET Endpoint Security is valuable for the money spent because it is lightweight on the system. We don't need to upgrade existing systems or resources, such as CPUs and memory. If there is an older system, it can run efficiently or function as required.

The price of  ESET Endpoint Security is affordable.

I rate the price of ESET Endpoint Security a four out of five.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate ESET Endpoint Security a nine out of ten.

We used ESET Endpoint Antivirus for the workstations to prevent Trojans, worms, and malware.

I liked that ESET Endpoint Antivirus was light, easy to install, and easy to integrate.

Online security could still be improved in ESET Endpoint Antivirus because security is threatened by phishing.

We used ESET Endpoint Antivirus for three years, but then we moved to a different solution. We used it in the previous year before we moved to Microsoft Defender.

ESET Endpoint Antivirus was easy to scale.

We didn't contact the ESET Endpoint Antivirus support team.

We didn't use a different solution previously, because we started with ESET Endpoint Antivirus.

The initial setup for ESET Endpoint Antivirus was straightforward. We installed it on many workstations.

We deployed ESET Endpoint Antivirus with our in-house team.

You need to pay for the ESET Endpoint Antivirus license monthly or yearly, whichever you choose.

We used the latest version of ESET Endpoint Antivirus.

We had one engineer who was responsible for the maintenance of the solution. We had fifteen users of the solution before we shifted to ESET Endpoint Protection Advanced.

I would recommend ESET Endpoint Antivirus to others, but currently, we're using Microsoft Defender.

I'm giving ESET Endpoint Antivirus a rating of seven.

The primary use case is for antivirus protection. 

We are currently in the process of installation of the Endpoint Detection and Response.

The most valuable features are the sandbox, mail scanning, sandboxing attachments, files, and that it responds to VPN porting. 

The IPS (Intrusion Prevention System) Firewall is not available. The solution includes only Intrusion Detection and not IPS, which is an important feature that is missing in my version.

In the next release, I would like to see the IPS Firewall included, as well as the VPN porting and Intelligence services. I would also like to see end-user behavior and not just antivirus.

I have been working with ESET Endpoint Security for two years.

This solution is stable.

We are just now in the installation process so we have not explored this area.

We have 1000 endpoints.

We have technical support in Isreal through a reseller. It's okay, they are good.

Previously I was using SEP, Symantec Endpoint Security, Check Point Endpoint Security, and Sophos. They are all very high-level. 

The company decided to try ESET, so we will have to wait and see.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It's still a very new product so I don't have all of the information. Maybe in a month or two, I will know more.

There are many differences with other solutions such as IPS Firewall, VPN, cloud management, and multi-level cloud management, that I cannot compare as I have not yet experienced all of these areas with ESET.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use this solution for security and email spam protection.

Once the initial setup and configuration is complete, you just have to sit back and monitor.

The most valuable feature is the antispam module, which comes in the bundle. It is very helpful and integrates with the local Outlook, or email, client.

The HIPS is another good feature.

The initial setup needs improvement because you have to create quite a few policies, and sometimes it misses machines when it comes to discovery. This means that you have to manually deploy on some.

Seamless discovery of endpoints would be an improvement.

Technical support can be improved.

I would like to see better deployment features in the next release.

If they had an agentless version, where for example it is integrated with Active Directory and there is no agent, then that would be an improvement. I don't know if it is possible, but you just discover the machines, deploy the software, and that's it. It would save a lot of time when it comes to installing the agents, especially if you have, for example, one thousand machines. It is for this reason that I would not recommend ESET on a larger scale.

The stability of this solution is good.

I have not had to scale this solution, but my understanding is that you just enter a license and that's it.

The availability of technical support is less than I would like. Out of five times that I call, they may be available two or three times. Overall, I would rate their support a seven out of ten. Certainly, this can be improved.

If, however, you do catch them, then the support is good. The engineer will help you.

I have worked with Cylance. It does not have the problem where some machines are missed during the initial setup and discovery process, but it suffers from having too many false positives. I think it is related to how it works, based on machine learning technology. This means that you have to create a lot of exceptions, time and time again, especially for applications that are crucial.

Recently, the setup of this solution is easy, but the configuration is time-consuming.

You have to make policies, and it is not a simple process. There are three steps involved, where first you have to deploy the agent, and then you have to create a policy to remove any existing antivirus software. A reboot is required following this step. After the reboot, you install the product and then you have to reboot again.

These steps are tedious and time-consuming, and really what I didn't like about this solution.

If I were in an environment that required a large-scale deployment then I would choose another solution over ESET.

I would not recommend this solution on a larger scale. To improve, they need to cut down the number of steps required for deployment. They also have to increase the availability of technical support.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.