Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Reviews

We mainly use this solution for end user data protection, and cloud security.

We particularly appreciate how scalable this solution is, as we often need to increase our end-user numbers.

The license prices for this solution are quite high.

We have been using this solution for four years.

We have found this solution to be easily and quickly scalable.

The technical support for this solution are very quick to respond when we raise issues with them.

We were using a different product previously, but switched to this solution because it has all of the features that we require.

The initial setup for this product was very straightforward. However, deployment times will vary, depending on which client we are working with, and their particular requirements.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I primarily use Endpoint for protection against viruses.

The most valuable feature is Endpoint's management.

The main problem with Endpoint is that Kaspersky is a Russian company, and my clients prefer not to use it.

I've been using this solution for ten years.

Endpoint is stable.

Kaspersky's technical support is good.

The initial setup is easy, taking no more than a week.

Endpoint's pricing is good, especially compared to expensive solutions like Sophos.

Endpoint is a good technical solution because it provides granular control over devices. I would give it a rating of eight out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for our servers. It's for security.

We enjoy the solution as, when we are online we are secure. It's easy to use and not too heavy. It doesn't slow down any machines at all. 

The product is quite stable.

It's scalable enough for us.

The product is straightforward to set up. 

There could be more secure.

The prices can go down a little bit.

I've used the solution for quite some time. It might have been six years at this point. 

It's a stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We find the product to be scalable. You can expand it if you need to.

We have five people using it in our organization. 

We've never contacted technical support. We've never had an issue. It works the way we need it to and we've never had a problem.

We started with Kaspersky. We didn't use a different solution previously.

The initial setup was straightforward. We are a tech company and therefore we found it pretty simple. Even a layman, however, can do the installation. It's not complex or difficult. We deployed it with our engineers. 

We handled the setup ourselves. We didn't need the help of any consultants or integrators. 

We'd like the pricing to be lower. It can get a bit pricey.

We pay for an annual license.

As a cloud solution, we're always on the latest version. We update it automatically on the cloud.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. There's room for improvement, however, we've largely been happy with it. 

We use this solution mainly for protection, but we also have another solution we use for this.

The content filtering options are good.

It consumes many system resources, and there should be more EDR details.

We have been using this solution for one year, and we are using the new version. It is deployed on-premises.

The solution is stable. Regarding detection, sometimes it consumes a lot of system resources.

It is scalable. We have not scaled it yet, but our customers use Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response, and they have not had any issues scaling.

We have not needed technical support. Instead, we deal with our cases and use Google to solve our problems.

We prefer CrowdStrike to Kaspersky.

It is not easy to set up. I believe the cloud version is easier to implement. We only deployed it on three computers, which didn't take much time. It was a bit of a struggle.

It is cheap compared to CrowdStrike. It costs $20 per user.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. Regarding advice, Kaspersky should work with a signature-less solution only because it's better and does not consume too many system resources. They should not use indicators because some new next-generation antivirus vendors are currently not using IOCs. Instead, they use IOA, which is better. In addition, Kaspersky could be GDPR compliant.

I use Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response for security protection for our endpoints for the users.

There is a problem with the solution, it came from Russia and we are looking for a replacement.

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response for approximately two years.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is a stable solution.

I have found Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response not to be scalable.

We have approximately 700 users using the solution. We do not have plans to increase usage. We are looking to switch solutions.

We were using Panda Antivirus previously.

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response's initial installation were straightforward. To installation of the solution on the end-users systems takes 10 minutes. However, from the console, it is a little more time, approximately two days to configure.

We only needed one person for the implementation and support of the solution. We had some support hours from the vendor if needed.

We were on a three-year license to use Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response. The price could be better.

I would not recommend this solution to others. We are moving to different solutions.

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response an eight out of ten.

I mainly use EDR to scan publicly-hosted servers and ensure they get automatically segregated upon detection of any threat.

Version 14.0 comes with an SQL database, which gives great flexibility on control, reviewing logs, and viewing history.

There are some issues with EDR's web policy blocking sites that are marked as exceptions. Also, recently, some policies have been getting disabled automatically. In the next release, EDR should include a web plugin.

I've been using EDR for two years.

We haven't had any issues with EDR's stability and have had full uptime over the last two years.

EDR is scalable - we've used it for 500 workstations.

Kaspersky have stopped providing free support, and their default support is only available on weekdays.

If you have all the installers downloaded and prerequisites ready, EDR can be deployed within an hour or two.

EDR is priced on the cheaper side. Licensing for EDR is available on a yearly basis for around 80 SAR a year.

EDR is a very good tool that can be used for a large user base without lag. I would rate EDR eight out of ten.

We use Kaspersky for our cash machines, 200 of which we have around the country. We use it to control the USB ports so nobody can use them without authorization from the owner. 

Currently, we implementing a new use case concerning our response when we get an alert.

In the past year, many banks have seen cases of ATM looting. We wanted to prevent that, which is why we implemented Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response. We are a bank and we haven't had any issues like the orders. Kaspersky helped us a lot. It helped up prevent unauthorized USB port usage. 

I would like to integrate Kaspersky with my Log Collector SIEM. Right now that's not possible. 

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response could also introduce a way to make working in teams more accessible. At the same time, it would be interesting to see them explore artificial intelligence solutions. 

I have been using this solution for two years. 

My impression of the stability of this solution is good. We have not had any issues with stability. 

We have not had any performance issues and our board really likes the solution. Our facility and technical support teams use this solution as they manage the cash machines. 

I think they are good and we haven't had any problems with them. We haven't had any critical issues that would have required us to call the US technical support of US; we have only been in touch with local technical support.

We previously used Sophos, Crowdstrike, and Microsoft Defender. The most important reason we transitioned to Kaspersky is the agent that is installed in the end points on the cash machine. The Kaspersky agent is really soft. With the others, we noticed that their agents would stop, so that made a big difference.

We used three or four people to deploy and maintain the solution. 

Our current monthly costs are $1,000. 

You have to be really informed about the process of using this tool before deploying. With our use case with the cash machines, for example, implementing the white list could have been really hard work for us if we had not had previous experience with it.

We primarily use the solution for security.

Overall, the solution is okay.

We have a central console and from there you can monitor all workstations via an agent. The agent is installed on workstations and servers and after that, the agent can contact the central server from which we can see all of the information. We can see if the antivirus has been updated, if the solution has been detecting anything, or if there are any issues, for example. 

The pricing is very good. It's quite cheap. It might be one of the least expensive. 

It does not cover all of our security issues. It's not a complete security solution. We'd like something like CrowdStrike Falcon. We'd like the same features as CrowdStike. If they can have even better features than CrowdStrike in the future, it would be better.

The solution lacks EDR features.

The solution is cheaper than other products. However, it's not as complete. 

We are looking to evaluate CrowdStrike. We understand that that solution covers more features.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It's a good product, however, it does not cover enough for us. We need something more expansive.