Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Reviews

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.

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.

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.

My primary use case of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is for security, such as anti-virus and patch deployment.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business has helped my organization by guaranteeing the security of all computers in our environment.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business's most valuable feature is the ease of management.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business could improve the flexibility of use.

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business for approximately one year.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is a stable solution.

We have approximately 25 people using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business in my organization.

I am satisfied with the support for Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business.

I was previously using Norton. 

The initial setup of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business was complex. The whole process took us two days.

We did the implementation of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business.

We use one person for the implementation and maintenance of this solution.

I have seen a return on investment from using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business.

The price of this solution is affordable and there is only a standard license required.

My advice to others wanting to implement Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is that it's a good solution.

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for endpoint protection along with catering to Office 365, OneDrive, Teams, SharePoint, Outlook, or Exchange - along with Windows update services.

The solution has definitely improved how our organization functions.

The solution, for what it does overall, is a very attractive solution.

The price per endpoint is excellent.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's pretty easy.

The solution has been very stable for us. We haven't had any issues with performance.

The scalability is there if a company needs to expand.

The reporting portion of the solution is quite weak. It needs to be improved upon. They could do a better job of making it more robust.

There's always room for improvement in everything, however, I can't think of a specific feature that is missing or lacking.

I've been using the solution for well over a year at this point. 

The product has been extremely stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. The performance has been good.

The scalability has been good so far. I haven't run into any issues as far as scaling goes. That said, we aren't an enterprise. I've had it as high as 300 clients.

For us, we probably have about a hundred users and I'd say a large majority of those are production floor people. The rest (25 to 30) are front office staff.

I've never used technical support before. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. It's just not something I've dealt with.

We used to have Cisco AMP. We switched over to Kaspersky.

The reason we switched was really related to a price point and wanting to push out Windows updates, kind of more than device management type functionality.

We've found the initial setup to be pretty simple and straightforward. It's not overly complex. A company shouldn't have any problem with the implementation process.

The cost structure is very reasonable. It's not overly expensive, which is part of the draw of the solution.

We're using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure of the version number.

In general, we've been quite happy with the solution overall. I would rate it at a seven out of ten.

A networked environment with workstations in remote stations. The organisation has a HQ where the IT centrally manages resources with AV being one of the resources.

The centralized management is a nice feature. It gives us the leeway to deal with other things as protection is being carried on in the background. We do not have to keep watching, as long as we have the right updates. In addition, it saves us time. 

The centralised management console. Ability to discover machines and see their realtime state. Integration with AD also helps in identifying sources of infection and acting appropriately

If someone has the older version of the solution, and wants to install a newer version, they must remove all of the previous applications. Otherwise, there will be issues with the solution in the long run. There should be a remover tool that is embedded on the agent. Then, it could check on incompatible previous versions and remove the same on the background. This needs improvement. There have been cases where one installs newer versions on top of existing version e.g 10.2 on top of 10.1 going onto 11.0 the upgrades will refuse to install requiring one to clean the machine of any trace of Kaspersky using the removal tool. In settings where centralised management is used the requirement that you handle an single computer is time consuming. I just want to be pushing the patches and upgrades without a hustle.

I think that there are issues of agents and the upgrades. 

The stability is OK. I have not had any crashing at all. I also have not had to repair the application. Any patches that I have to do, I do it and move on.

Scaling is fine. 

The licensing is fine, and it is well within reasonable rates.

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. 

We deploy it to every computer, server, and workstation within our network and also some home computers and laptops for endpoint protection.

I like how it protects the network and all the endpoints.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security could have more visibility and threat hunting. Right now, if it detects a file, it's quarantined, and then we can't find more details other than the path and the file name. We don't see what process it's warning off and how the virus got in. So, the reporting on the quarantined items, why were they quarantined, etc., could be improved.

We can't monitor outside of the network, so scalability could be improved as well.

The ability to control notifications regarding updates and licensing from one main computer would be great. At present, you have to physically go to each computer when a new agreement pops up. We have about 100 licenses, and this can be time consuming.

Technical support could be better.

I've been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for the last six to seven years.

It's pretty stable. In the last six to seven years, we have encountered problems with the memory once or twice and had them fixed.

As for scalability, we can't monitor outside of the network. For instance, if we deployed Kaspersky on laptops, we won't be able to monitor all the laptops at home. We lose control, so I think scalability could be improved as well.

My experience with technical support has been okay, but it could be better.

The initial setup was pretty easy. We deployed the administration server and then used the administration server to push all the agents, Kaspersky agent and then Kaspersky Endpoint.

It took about a day to deploy the solution in our environment with about 60 devices within the network.

We deployed it through a team in-house.

It's good, but we want more features. It's good for the price though.

The licensing cost can be about $1,300 per year.

I'm not sure how good the EDR side, the endpoint detection and protection, is. Is it based on behavioral detection or only based on file signature? Does it compare any known viruses to databases for all known viruses? Can it detect a new virus based on the behavior of the process?

If it got infected by a new virus, new malware, it may not detect it. I question if it's good for behavioral detection. I think the cloud version will be better, but I have not tried it.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security at three because other products provide more visibility and more EDR features.