Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Reviews

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.

We are using Kaspersky Endpoint Security. There are two products: 

1. Kaspersky Skill Center (supply management)
2. Kaspersky Endpoint Security

We use Kaspersky Endpoint Security for manual production and supply production. We also use it for additional control in manufacturing.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security did help us a little but there were still some problems. For example, we had problems in processing payment issues from the gateway country. 

Overall, we implemented Kaspersky Endpoint Security because it enabled us to reduce costs.

The manual production is what drew us to Kaspersky Endpoint Security.

This solution needs improvement in the reporting section. Reporting in Kaspersky Endpoint is good but it's not that great. The platform needs to centralize reporting control.

They should include some BMP features, like a BD board or MP board and some D&B company in the near future. That would be good.

The product is very stable and we haven't faced any issues as of now.

The scalability of Kaspersky Endpoint Security is very simple and easy. You don't need to buy a separate server or hardware. It can easily be configured. 

Right now we have more than 4,500 users. Two staff members are required to maintain the solution.

Technical support with Kaspersky is really good. The response from customer support is on time. We have a Kaspersky support license, so our response time is almost two hours. 

Usually, with Kaspersky customer support, we will have a solution within two hours.

We have seven countries under us. Some of the countries were using McAfee and some of the countries were using Symantec.

The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment took only two machines and was completed in less than a month.

We used an integrator company and the experience was very good.

For ROI, we are working on some issues. Kaspersky has helped a lot. We get feeds from all over the world. We have to log these and find integrity checks in our industry. 

This is also some regulatory requirement. In the end, it's also helped us plan our contribution as well. For our part, Kaspersky Endpoint Security has helped us a lot.

Our license for Kaspersky Endpoint Security is on a yearly basis. We have a yearly subscription. They have multiple options available at no additional costs.

The remote management and new client process, plus the support, led us to Kaspersky. We are very satisfied with Kaspersky products.

In the latest tests, there were some issues there. We had decided to go with Kasperksy, but we reevaluated McAfee, Symantec, and other solutions. In the end, we chose Kasperksy.

The advice I would give someone implementing this solution is that the management of the solution is very easy. You don't need a lot of people to manage the solution. 

Everything can be done with Kaspersky Endpoint Security. The good thing is that the epicenter of support staff doesn't have to go climbing through the issues. 

They make it very easy for us to manage solutions. I would rate it 8.5 out of 10.

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 use Kaspersky Endpoint Security for user protection. 

This solution is deployed on-premises. 

Some of the most valuable features are the security and the stability, which are great. There are some imperfections, but everything is fine. In general, I think it's one of the best solutions. 

Maybe the solution's monitoring could be improved with more dashboards, so there's no back and forth, back and forth.  

We have been using this solution for more than five years. 

This product is stable. 

Our team has done some automating and set up auto-maintenance. 

This solution is scalable. 

There are more than 1,000 users of this Kaspersky solution in our organization. We have plans to increase our usage. 

We have never contacted technical support. 

I don't remember exactly, but I think the installation probably took a maximum of three hours for my engineers, maybe less. You can do it yourself. We had a team of four engineers to handle the deployment. 

We implemented this solution through an in-house team. 

The licensing is affordable. We bought a three-year license. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard license fees. 

I rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security a ten out of ten. We have been using Kaspersky since the beginning, and I would definitely recommend it to others who are considering implementation. As I mentioned, I think it's one of the best solutions. Everything is there—the database, information, support—and we're happy that we're using this. 

We primarily use the solution for version and device control. That's why we have moved to Kaspersky. It's meant to be assisting us with device and control issues.

The solution is light. It's is easy on the client-side, and even on the server. It doesn't take much processing power. There's no bottleneck of the applications.

We have the ability to restrict users and third-party VPNs. We have control over the user and application access and have put in place policy-based safeguards also.

The solution has been quite stable.

The scalability is good. 

We have found the initial setup to be rather straightforward. 

We found that, for some reason, some site URLs were being blocked in Kaspersky. However, we have since found a solution. As it stands now, the URL opening issue has been resolved on our end.

The solution could be more secure. 

We have been using Kaspersky for almost two years.

The stability is good. The performance is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability of the product has been good overall. If you need to expand it, you can.

In head office, we are using the product on the client end for about 100 plus people. On the server end, we use it as well for about 60.

We've never contacted technical support as we have not found any complexity regarding the product. It's a product that is easy to deploy and control. 

We are also using Symantec. While we have been using Kaspersky for about two years, we've used Symantec for around eight to ten years.

We also leverage a Cisco-based firewall to increase security.

The installation is very straightforward and simple. It's not difficult. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process. 

We have two personnel that handle deployment and maintenance. One is currently managing it, and the other is managing the client end.

We have a yearly license with Kaspersky currently. It has already gotten renewed after its first expiry. We will renew it. When we renew it, we tend to make sure it's also as up-to-date as possible. 

We have the latest version of the solution installed currently.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten overall. We are quite happy with its capabilities so far. 

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.

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.

It helps me with the security policies that I make. I can change policies quickly and easily.

Also, it stopped ransomware that other vendors could not catch.

The valuable features are the antivirus, the firewall, the network blocker, and application and device control.

I would like to see improvements in the device control features, which are limited.

I can block devices by the policy in the device control such as usb and cd but i can block devices like sound that not supported by Kaspersky
I would see update in the device control policy that let me add devices by its id
To control them by block or allow it
That will help the administrator for full control and will rate the kaspersky to be the number one in the field

I have been using this solution since 2012.

There were no stability issues.

Customer Service:

Customer service is excellent.

Technical Support:

I used technical support through a vendor and they were perfect.

I previously used Symantec Endpoint. I switched because it's weak against ransomware attacks and against email attachments containing viruses and Trojan horses.

The initial setup was easy and I had no problem with it.

Pricing and licensing is good.

I evaluated other options like McAfee, Sophos, Symantec Endpoint, and FortiClient, but they weren’t good enough for me.

Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business provides a full suite of endpoint security features in one easy-to-manage application. With this product deployed, administrators can ensure endpoints are protected from malware, as well as perform a host of functions, such as patch and systems management, encryption of both files and whole disks, and application control. Furthermore, this tool features mobile device management and security capabilities. All this functionality can be driven from a single management console that is well integrated with the existing enterprise infrastructure.

Kaspersky is the best antivirus software to this day, always was, always will (i hope so). It offers a great protection against viruses and spywares

Kaspersky Endpoint Security offers a powerful and robust system for securing systems in a business environment. Its scanning and detection engine handles most threats easily and is well developed to deal with new threats that continually come down the pipeline. The program is also easy to use as an end user. its encryption system does a very good job of securing sensitive files without a performance hit on most systems. Endpoint also has great administrative tools for setting up the program and for ongoing maintenance purposes. As an added plus, the program also works with other non-Windows systems which can be highly valuable in a mixed system OS environment.