Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Reviews

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is a cost-effective solution. 

The product offers support only through mail and not on the phone. 

I have been working with the product for two years. 

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is stable. 

The tool's deployment is easy. It took five years to deploy the product. 

I rate the product a seven out of ten. 

The solution is primarily used for protection. It's useful for internet accessing and network accessing protection and for flash memory protection from sharing, accessing, and other attacks.

The solution is very stable. It offers very good security protection.

The installation process is straightforward.

The performance is not very good. It's acceptable with the security. That said, the issue is that, when I opened the browser without Kaspersky antivirus, it's open in a few seconds, however, when I installed the antivirus on the laptop or computer and we try to open it, just open the browser, it takes double the amount of time. Without the antivirus, it's opening in four seconds and with the antivirus it's opening in 20 seconds. It's making everything hang.

We've used the solution for about two years at this point. 

The stability of the product is good, and it does offer good protection. However, the performance isn't as good, as it slows systems down.

We have about 25 users on the solution currently. 

We likely will increase usage in the near future.

I've never had to contact technical support. It's so easy I don't need to contact the help desk or technical team of Kaspersky.

Before Kaspersky, I was using ESET. We got a good offer from Kaspersky that had a lower price point and therefore we moved to them. 

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's very straightforward and very simple. 

It's a server installation. It takes about one or two hours, and the implementation for every user takes minutes as it's around in the background.

For the administration of the solution, we only need one of our technical team members to manage it. For the installation, it takes two people. It might take two or three hours before it's deployed for all of the users.

We can handle the installation ourselves, with our own in-house team.

We pay a yearly licensing fee.

This product costs less than our past solution, ESET.

We're using the latest version of the solution at this time. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

The solution is used for our enterprise. We primarily use the solution for security. We use it for detection purposes. 

The solution offers very high, effective, detection rates.

The solution offers a very good performance overall. It's reliable. 

The initial setup was extremely straightforward and very easy.

The stability is good.

We would always like to see even more security features. It's something the solution should continue to improve upon.

The UI, user interface, could be improved. They should update it.

I've been using the solution for a while. It's been about three years at this point.

The stability of the solution is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. The performance has been excellent over the years. 

We protect around 2,000 endpoints with this product.

We do have plans to continue to use the solution. I cannot speak to if expansion is in the works. 

I've never dealt with technical support directly. I can't comment on their level of service or responsiveness, having never dealt with them directly myself.

The initial setup was not complex or difficult for us. It was very simple and very straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the solution's setup.

The deployment was quick. It only took us about three or so days.

We handled the implementation ourselves. We did it in-house. We did not need an integrator or consultant to assist us.

In the past, we've looked at ESET Endpoint Security.

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Kaspersky.

We are using the latest version of the solution at this time. I cannot speak to the exact version number.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been mostly quite happy with the product and how it has performed for us.

I'd recommend the solution to other users. 

The solution is used as an antivirus for protection.

The setup and implementation are easy.

The threat intelligence features are not up to date.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The product is stable.

The product is scalable. We have five customers.

The setup depends on the solutions. If we use it with normal solutions, it takes ten minutes. If we use it with VMware or other infrastructure like Hyper-V, it will require additional effort.

We are partners. The tool must update its signature, threat intelligence features, and IoC. The signature is not sufficient. It is not authentic. Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

The tool's interface is good. 

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business should improve its reporting. There are also some issues in the cloud portal. The solution's pricing can be cheaper. 

I have been working with the solution for four years. 

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is stable. 

We have more than 11,000 customers for the product and it is scalable. 

My experience with customer support is good. 

Neutral

The tool's installation is easy. You can install it in a week's time. 

The solution's pricing is acceptable. 

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

Our primary use case is for protecting our desktops and critical servers. This solution is deployed on-premises. 

One of the most valuable features of this product is that it's good for endpoint protection. 

This product could be improved by integration with Linux. The one limitation this product has is that it's not compatible with and doesn't offer protection for Linux servers. It could also be easier to configure. 

We have been using this solution for six to seven years. 

Our organization has approximately 500 users of this solution. 

We have local support that we contact in case of any issues. If local support is unable to resolve it, then we connect the issue to Kaspersky. 

We haven't used any other solutions. We have used Kaspersky from the beginning. 

The installation was easy, all you need to do is install it with the installer. The configuration is a bit tricky, though. You can do it yourself if you are knowledgeable in this area, but if not, you may need help from the vendor. We had a team of three or four who handled deployment, in addition to the support we received from the vendor. 

Installation time will depend on the organization since each organization will have different things to configure. It should take somewhere between half an hour to an hour to configure, but it depends on the size of the organization. 

We implemented through an in-house team, but had vendor support. 

We pay for licensing annually. 

We also evaluated Rapid7's AppSpider product, which is an application vulnerability scanning solution. We had done the POC, but we had issues with the licensing model, so we dropped it. 

I rate Kaspersky an eight out of ten. I would 100% recommend Kaspersky to others who are considering implementation. 

Our primary use case for Kaspersky Endpoint Security is to protect our endpoint machines and ideally we are also looking at protecting our server. However, I had challenges deploying it to the servers. It was making them really slow.

The feature that I have found most valuable is its deployment. It is easy to centrally deploy. You can deploy it on the Administration Console then deploy it to the different endpoint machines without specifically deploying it manually on each machine. Its deployment is really user friendly. 

Additionally, scheduled tasks like scanning and safe rules, taking rules and grouping the different machines, being able to pick updates automatically and deploy them remotely are generally very easy, though we've had some challenges.

There are quite a number of areas for improvement. The first area for improvement is that I find this solution to be very resource intensive when you're running a particular task, even a mere scanning task, even though it's running in the background. When you go to inspect the resources you realize it makes the machine very slow. It takes up a lot of resources even though there are no particular scanning tasks scheduled to run. That's one of the issues.

The second area for improvement had to do with machines at one point being unable to communicate with the Central Server or the Heartbeat.

Another issue is related to installations. There is a feature for remotely deploying the solution on your endpoint machines, but some machines can fail. There was a particular incident where I needed to reinstall the solution again and it wasn't uninstalling. So the uninstallation process was a bit challenging. I had to install the machine again manually. They were Windows machines so I had to go and restore the machine again. Uninstalling it and reinstalling it on some machines can be a bit challenging.

Additionally, the way it handles threats is an area for improvement. Suppose there is a particular threat that has been detected, maybe someone inserted their flash drive or something. It does not give me an option to configure. I don't know if I was doing it right so that the threat is neutralized without me having to log on to the Administration Console. Then you go to Active Threats and manually delete that threat. I thought it would be intelligent enough. For instance, if I compare it to the Defend, if the flash drive has a virus it'll delete it automatically or quarantine it and give me a notification. Here, I don't get notifications. There is no feature providing me with real time notifications. I have to manually go to the Administration Console, log on and try to view if there are active threats on the network. 

There is also the issue of synchronization with the Active Directory particularly if I'm using the Linux server. Sometimes you have a machine you have deleted from the Active Directory or disconnected from the network but that machine is still appearing in the Administration Console and you have to delete it manually. These are some of the challenges we meet with Kaspersky Endpoint Security.

In terms of what I would like to see in the next release, I would like it to be a bit lighter. I've used a couple of other solutions and I find them lighter to use than Kaspersky. Kaspersky really has to improve on that aspect of making sure that it's not consuming a lot of resources.

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for the last five years.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security is scalable.

Normally, we don't contact tech support directly. We rely on the partner here who supplies the solution.

Our license is a paid license which we pay annually. Every year we have been renewing the licenses.

I don't have any issues with the price. I think the pricing is fair.

We have been using Kaspersky Endpoint for Business Advanced. We are making a switch over to Sophos Intercept Advanced.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Kaspersky Endpoint Security an eight.

We provide the solution for endpoint protection.

We provide the tool based on the client’s requirements. The product improves data protection and network security. The solution’s threat detection and response capability is powerful. Our customers like it. The experience with the management console is good. We have integrated the product with existing solutions and new infrastructures. The implementation and integration are easy.

The support must provide quick responses.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The support is not responsive.

Neutral

The tool is too expensive compared to other products. The licensing model is good.

I will recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.