Intercept X Endpoint Reviews

The primary use case is basically having a synchronized perspective on what's going on between endpoints, firewalls, and whatever other types of preventative measures the customer has. 

The fewer panes of glass you've got to go to to try to investigate an event, the better off you are. If there's some automation that goes on within the fabric, or whatever you want to call it, this coordinated effort, then you're going to come out ahead as a small organization. Sophos has one pane of glass, so it gives good visibility. There's less time spent in front of the screen because I have confidence in the automation that's going on.

It's been pretty reliable. There's been a few times when it hasn't just taken care of problems. The automation is very convenient.

There's Sophos Central where the customer has a single pane of glass. You can manage everything. 

The thing that I like about it is the synchronized security. You can tie endpoint protection and firewalls and a whole range of other services and products. You can get your servers taken in under this.

It has a Linux version that's available. 

What I look for in dealing with small businesses, is for something that is not going to add to their staffing requirements significantly in terms of management. That's true with both Sophos as with Fortinet. 

There's great situational awareness within all the other components. If I have a workstation, usually they're just taking care of everything without me even knowing about it unless I go into the logs and see what's been cleaned up. I don't care if something gets cleaned up, I do care if something doesn't get cleaned up. My reporting is set to an on exception basis to ensure I don't have a firehose of information pointed at me to overwhelm me. Customers don't generally want to know every little thing that's happening on their network. What they want to know is if something has happened that puts their environment or their infrastructure in jeopardy. Sophos does this exceptionally well.

The pricing of the solution is quite good.

The problem is that if you have a lot of different components going on, each managed under a different umbrella, then you're going to be spending a lot of time hopping back and forth between the different components to see, "Well, I got hit here. What did my firewall see? I got hit in the firewall, the firewall says it allowed that attack in, did it land on anything to compromise any of my endpoints?" I see that all the time. That's a question I always have in the reports I give my customers. "Okay. So this happened last month. And as you can see, there were all these attacks knocking at the door, but none were allowed through." If someone got through, then I'm going to be concerned.

I've been working with this solution alongside a customer for two years now.

The stability is great. We've never had issues with its reliability. It doesn't crash or freeze. There aren't bugs or glitches. It protects us well.

The solution scales really well. They have great resources on hand for managing it within the cloud. I haven't found any issues with capacity. I've never heard of anyone ever having issues in that regard.

Typically we deal with small businesses. When I say "small business" I am referring to a company of around 250 people.

Technical support has been very, very good. They're reliable and knowledgable. We've been satisfied with the level of service provided. 

We also have experience with Fortinet. Fortinet has what they call their security fabric, which does about the same thing. Basically you have a number of different products, different solutions, and it's all under a single pane of glass and everything's coordinated so that any member or any component of that fabric or synchronized security is aware, has situational awareness of what other components are experiencing. If there's an attack that breaks out in one place, then there's going to be the opportunity for basically isolating that particular component so that it doesn't allow lateral movement.

I've used other solutions. The reason that I like Sophos is mostly due to the synchronized security and cloud management. Other solutions that I've dealt with have been point solutions. I've needed to figure out how to get that situational awareness between the different points. You have to do that. The name of the game these days is to evade the parameter. I have to not only protect the endpoint as if there was no firewall, but I also have to make sure that I've got as much intelligence going on about the state of my internal network so that everybody knows what's happening next door to them.

The initial setup was a piece of cake. It wasn't complex at all. It's very straightforward.

I can justify the pricing for customers and I can explain what they're doing from a pricing standpoint in terms of the different risks that they're handling. I'm all about risk management. Unfortunately, we lose awareness of that, the calculus that goes into that when nothing's going wrong. 

You have to ask: what are you trying to protect? What are you willing to spend to protect that, and what's your expected loss if something happens? You have to look at all things and then decide if the number is fair. I'd argue that it is.

We're partners with Sophos. We're a consulting company and we provide some managed services. Sophos products are some that I deploy and manage for my customers.

I don't have the EDR or any of the really sophisticated stuff. The client doesn't think that they have a need to go to another level. 

I don't have EDR or MTR deployed for the customer. I work primarily with small businesses. So sometimes it's kind of hard to get them to invest more than what they feel comfortable doing.

Other organizations should give it serious consideration if they are looking for a solution. The price point is not unreasonable and the management and the continued evolution that I see within the product means that they're not sitting on their haunches waiting for the next big thing. They're constantly moving forward, trying to keep abreast of what's going on. 

We're in an arms race when it comes to cybersecurity. When you look at SophosLabs out of the UK and the work that they're doing in their blogs like Naked Security and whatnot, they're constantly in the forefront, constantly trying to find different threats. It's impressive, to say the least. All of that percolates down into their product because that's what drives their product.

I'd rate the solution at eight out of ten. The solution is consistently showing me that it has a very effective rubric that it follows through on in terms of identifying and remediating, particularly in the area of ransomware. They can handle everything without having to have somebody get down in the weeds and recover things. I like the automation that it brings into the work that's done. That was the wow factor that drew me to them, to begin with.

The most valuable features of Intercept X are server lockdown, auto-remediation, and encryption monitoring. Server lockdown prevents malware installation and automatically removes any unauthorized software. Auto-remediation reverses encryption attempts by malware, ensuring data integrity.

In terms of improvements, Intercept X could enhance its support services, particularly in terms of response time and resource allocation. While the product itself is solid, better support documentation and faster response times would be beneficial.

I have been working with Intercept X Endpoint for four years.

I would rate the stability of the solution as a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of the solution as a ten out of ten.

I would rate the technical support as a seven out of ten.

Neutral

While I found Symantec easier to implement and manage, it is not a fair comparison to say it is better than Sophos. My experience with Symantec's interface was good, but both products have their strengths.

Configuring Intercept X is generally straightforward and user-friendly. It is designed to be easy to understand and use. I would rate the easiness of the initial setup as an eight out of ten.

The deployment time for Intercept X varies depending on factors like network complexity and organizational policies. Typically, for around 100 users, it can be completed in a day or two. Maintenance is generally straightforward unless support assistance is required, which can sometimes be challenging to coordinate.

Intercept X falls within the average price range compared to other solutions on the market. While not the cheapest option available, it also isn't considered expensive.

Intercept X has enhanced our ability to prevent malware and ransomware infections. It is a top-notch product, providing robust protection against various threats, including zero-day attacks, while also monitoring encryption levels.

Intercept X has been instrumental in managing and responding to ransomware attacks. I have witnessed multiple organizations using Intercept X remain completely secure when ransomware incidents hit the news. 

Deep learning technology enhances our security posture by providing a deeper analysis of malware behavior. It monitors and analyzes malware actions in real time, leveraging extensive threat intelligence data collected since 1985. This comprehensive approach improves our ability to detect and respond to malware threats effectively.

The exploit prevention capabilities of Intercept X effectively safeguard against various attack methods, including SQL injection and CodeSight scripting. It continuously monitors system vulnerabilities and application processes to prevent exploitation attempts. 

For those considering Intercept X Endpoint, I would recommend prioritizing its comprehensive protection and user-friendly experience. Even after transitioning from server management, I continue to use Intercept X for mobile security, highlighting its effectiveness and versatility.

Overall, I would rate Intercept X as an eight out of ten.

We are using it for endpoint antivirus, hardening, and some DLP policies. Its version is the current one.

It is very easy to set up and easy to use. It is also not resource-intensive.

It has been very stable. It has done a good job of stopping and preventing different threats from being triggered.

Sophos has a lot of different features. Some of them are tied to different clients, which may mean that different prices or licenses have to be added on. It can be a little bit confusing if you're not familiar with the logic of how they work. They can make it a little bit clearer.

I have been using this solution for about a year and a half. 

Systems have been stable during deployment. It is not resource-intensive, and it has been working well.

It has been easy to add additional Sophos components. They all are using the same console. We have about 400 users who are using this solution.

We were using Symantec. We switched because we just needed something that was a little bit more aggressive and next-generation from an antivirus perspective.

It is very easy to set up.

We had a third party that helped us set it up.

It was fairly and reasonably priced.

I would advise others to thoroughly vet out because Sophos has a lot of different features. It can be a little bit confusing in terms of licensing.

I would rate Sophos Intercept X a solid eight out of 10.

We use it for all of its features, with the exception of mobile device management. We use it for DLP, malware protection, some forms of asset tracking, application blocking, and so forth.

It is deployed on-premises and on the cloud. We are using its latest version.

Malware protection and application blocking are absolutely great. The DLP and malware features are very helpful.

It is also very user-friendly, reliable, and scalable. It is easy to set up. We are also happy with its price and support.

Mobile device management is a challenging area, and it can be improved. Some areas in the DLP solution can also be improved. It has the DLP capability, but it is not an all-out DLP program. I would like to see them improve the DLP solution in terms of reporting and possibly network monitoring. Currently, they only do the reporting parts of it.

I have been using this solution for close to two years.

It is a very reliable solution.

It is very easily scalable. We have scaled it, and we had very minor problems in expanding it across the organizations and new acquisitions.

They provide a great response. They are available through email and phone calls. After you create a ticket, they will respond within 24 hours.

We've only used Symantec. Symantec is nowhere near this solution.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Our team did the deployment. We got the training from them, and we did the deployment ourselves.

Compared to other solutions, such as CrowdStrike, we are most certainly happy with its pricing. We did a three year-business deal.

I most certainly would recommend this solution. One of the recommendations would be to make sure that you have a plan and a dedicated team to be able to manage all of the functions that are in the Sophos solution.

I would rate Sophos Intercept X an eight out of ten.

We are providing this product and support for it in many sectors like health care, retail, sports, and communication sectors. We are also working with Sophos, but with Sophos Endpoint, not XG, or Sophos UTM. We work with Raya (Contact Center) that provides services here in Egypt (they are also using Sophos 550 XG models).

It improves organizations by providing dependable, intelligent attack defenses.

The most valuable feature in Intercept is its engine for machine learning. It is awesome. Its detection capabilities are saving many of our customers' databases from ransomware and other random attacks. The most interesting thing in the Sophos center is the EDR. It is easy to manage and work with. There is no need to have a cyber-security team define its tasks. In the next few years, it will be an agent EDR.

I guess really the best part of the package is the same thing that could use the most improvement. The machine learning is good and it is already developed in the database and its engine. I guess they already have processes to cover more intelligent attacks. I am not sure about the improvements possible in this area. They have developed it to discover new attacks. But it is just an engine. There are no features that users have to look inside it. I think allowing more user modification could improve this at least for purposes of customization. But I don't know if it is possible and it is just to continue to improve on what already works.

As far as added features, I would like to see some type of event management in the product. It should not just depend on the logs only. It would be something to deal with the events on PCs in a similar way to enhance the effectiveness of Intercept X and EDR. 

The stability of the product is very good as is the performance. As it works in the background there is never instability in the form of hanging at the work stations or producing false positives. It is very easy to deploy, very simple to use, very light on the operating systems' resources. But there are some guidelines that customers or anyone making the deployment have to keep in mind. They have to make rules and use the product intelligently to avoid any extra false positives or any performance issues. For example, they will want to make full scanning of the environment in times where there is a lower load on the system — in off-hours and not during the prime-time hours. But that responsibility is on the operator. 

The performance of the product itself is very stable and very good.

Scalability can happen in one click. If you have another device to add to the environment, you just make the deployment from the server on-premises. The customer does not have to depend only on the cloud server to scale. They also have an on-premise server that makes the rules between the cloud and the LAN environment to avoid any internet disconnects, or bandwidth and performance issues. They can depend on the cache server to communicate on behalf of the client to the on-cloud dashboards.

I personally think the company's technical support is perfect. They always address issues satisfactorily.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

I am not just using it in our department, we are also dealing with installations for customers. We play the role of IT. We enable Sophos products for partners. We do all the work if the customer doesn't have a technical team. We make projects for implementation and providing training.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Intercept X as a nine out of ten. I don't think I can rate any software security product a ten because nothing in software security is100%. 

We are deploying Intercept X on Cloud, not on-premises. The reason for this is because the previous versions of Sophos made the agents different between the anti-virus, endpoint and the Intercept X. Now with the Cloud, Sophos is making one agent for the three technologies — the endpoint, Intercept X, and EDR (Intelligent Endpoint Detection and Response). The three components are in one agent and managed by one dashboard, Sophos Central.

The malware detection is the key feature. It provides exploit prevention and rollback capabilities to counter ransomware attacks.

Pricing could be cheaper.

I have been using Intercept X Endpoint for over ten years.

It is stable for our customers.

Support is very responsive.

Positive

Kaspersky is currently only focused on government, whereas Sophos is focused on SMBs and mega enterprises.

The initial setup is easy and takes around five to ten minutes, depending on the network.

The pricing is a little bit higher than that of other solutions.

Some people are using AI technology to detect and regress malware.

It is easy to maintain. I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My client is a BPO with three branches. One branch is in the US, and two branches are in India. We are using Sophos for the best connectivity. We are using Sophos for endpoint, DLP, and encryption. We are also using it for content filtering and managing security policies. Currently, we are using its latest version.

It is stable and has a good price. I find it very good.

They need to focus on their SLA or technical support. They also need to focus on their UI.

They should also improve their content filtering tool and update it so that correct categories are there. Sometimes, when I want to block an online gaming website, it is not shown under the correct category. It is shown under another category. They need to review their content filtering tool on a bi-weekly or monthly basis and update the sites and categories. This will be really helpful for them.

I have been using this solution for two to three years.

I am happy with its stability.

I have not scaled it. Currently, I have only one client who is using it.

They need to work on their SLA or technical support. Their technical support is not as good as Cisco's support. 

They get back in one or two hours, which is not good enough for a security or firewall solution. This is because an organization's security and all the outgoing and incoming traffic depends on the firewall. When they take one hour and two hours to provide the support, an organization is in danger during that whole duration. There are many threats on the internet, and they need only five minutes to hack.

We also work with Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Check Point solutions. If a client has Check Point, we work with that. Similarly, if a client has Sophos, we work with Sophos. We have knowledge of different end products. As compared to Cisco ASA, Sophos is good. However, Palo Alto and Check Point are better than Sophos.

If you have more than five years of experience in network security or network administration, it is easy, but if you are a fresher, it is very difficult.

In terms of duration, it takes two days for it to be completely functional in production. Just connecting it doesn't take more than three to four hours.

Price-wise, it is good. Currently, we have a three-year plan.

I would definitely recommend this solution. I find it very good. If you have an experienced engineer with more than five years of experience, you can easily maintain a Sophos solution. An experienced engineer would not require any support and will be capable of handling it. However, if you have someone with two or three years of experience, it will be difficult to handle all the features.

I would rate Sophos Intercept X an eight out of ten.

We use the product to protect endpoints and cloud-based servers.

The product efficiently prevents data leakages.

There should be a report including a flowchart or diagram. It will be useful to evaluate the software’s effectiveness.

I have been using Intercept X Endpoint for two years. We are using the latest version.

Around 200 people are using Intercept X Endpoint in our organization.

The technical support is good.

Positive

We have used Microsoft before. We switched to Sophos servers for security purposes.

There are always some glitches during the initial setup process, but the product has a strong technical team to handle the issues.

In case of any malicious attacks, there should be some scheduled report, like, weekly, monthly, or daily. It will help me see the number of attacks.

I rate Intercept X Endpoint a seven out of ten.