Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Reviews

This solution hasn't really been improved any functionality on the organizational level except that there are no complaints related to the endpoint protection. With the new update, they have incorporated some advanced protection and behavior detection. We have gained advanced threat protection without investing more into it.

According to my security engineer, Kaspersky essentially protects the devices. Before Kaspersky, we had other solutions that always had some problems with phishing, malware, and other threats. After using Kaspersky, we never have those issues.

Prior to using this solution, we also had performance complaints from users. Now, with Kaspersky, we never have performance issues. I would say it is the protection. Yes, there is the ability to protect against normal malware and the performance of the endpoint. It doesn't degrade any performance while working.

I would like to have more forensic features. For example, if we are hit by an attack, I would like to have tools to investigate what kind of attack, who has attacked, how it was attacked, and what we could do to stop this kind of attack in the future. I would like to have more forensics capability built into Kaspersky.

On a scale of one to nine, I would give this solution a nine. It is highly stable. It is live, and constantly updating and stable.

In terms of scalability, I would not give it such a high rating. I would rate it a four out of ten. If I want to scale beyond, let's say 500 times, then I will have to read, and do my back-end. It does not have the architecture or structure to scale up.

The initial setup was not easy. We had to consult a help-desk during the process.

It is a cost-effective product.

We switched to Kaspersky because we had issues with other solutions. There were performance issues amongst other things. We switched to Kaspersky because we researched other opinions. 

Because of our security information, it is a good idea not to have a single endpoint protection solution for a long time. It is good to change the endpoint solution, after three or four years, for example. There should be a change in the endpoint solution because, let's say, most vendors are good at forensics. They also have a forensic ability. Some of them are very good at addressing malware protection, but not forensics. Kaspersky can do both.

We primarily implement the solution for our clients. It's primarily for securing endpoints.

This solution has a good history. We began with Kaspersky. It had a lot of market share and people were very aware of this product. 

The solution can scale.

The stability has been good.

The price is a bit expensive. Since 2018, we were moved from Kaspersky South Africa to Kaspersky France. They began increasing the price. In the beginning, they gave us rebates. We began with 25% and now we're down to 12%.

It's more and more difficult for our customers. It's grown more expensive and customers are not happy about it.  

The solution has been stable. Sometimes clients might have configuration issues, however, we have been able to deal with that and help them through. It doesn't crash or freeze. there aren't bugs. It's reliable. 

The solution is scalable and has an add-on EDR as an option. If a company wants to expand its offering, it can. It's not an issue.

We have many solutions that we deal with. The best is Kaspersky for sure. However, we are expanding our business on Symantec, also, for the last three years. With Acronis, we are just beginning. We have no more than one year with this product.

The deployment isn't bad. We can help clients with it and walk them through it to make everything easy. 

We are able to assist clients if they need help with the initial setup

The solution is growing more expensive and it's becoming an issue.

We are using the latest version of the solution, the Cloud Free Plus with add-on EDR. The last version.

I'd advise potential new users to be confident in the product.

I'm satisfied with the product, however, I'm not really going any deeper with it than I already am. If you don't have protection, ransomware might get you, and then things will be a mess. It's good to have some protection.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been happy with the product's capabilities. 

We use Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business to protect against threats.

I have found the most useful features to be protected against viruses, mail threats, encryption of the devices, and MDM. There are a lot of features.

The encryption feature could improve.

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business for approximately eight years.

The Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business solution is stable.

We have approximately 700 users using this solution.

The support is very helpful, they are good.

I have previously used Bitdefender eight years ago and it was not stable.

The installation is simple. It can be deployed on Windows, Mac, and servers.

I am able to do the implementation of the solution, it is easy to do.

We have approximately 700 licenses for this solution and we pay annually.

I would recommend this solution to others and I rate it the best solution.

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

We primarily use the solution for endpoint protection within our organization.

The solution offers many useful features. 

There is excellent integration with the app directory. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

At the moment, the support of XP and Windows Server 2003 is not there. At this moment I need to support of these platforms. However, Kaspersky does not these anymore. It's one reason why I decided to change to a solution that supports XP and our Windows Server, which is 2003.

The cloud needs to be more robust. We have 1,500 users and Kaspersky has issues handling them. It's a problem.

Other solutions (such as Malwarebytes) will scan the same files or areas and detect problems that this solution seems to miss entirely. It's not as secure as we would like it to be. It misses viruses.

Right now, you need to contract another console to integrate EDR. It would be ideal if Kaspersky also offered this instead of having to farm it out to another company. It would be great if everything could be centralized on one console as well.

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

I'm not sure how stable or robust the solution is. Things seem to get through. While Kaspersky doesn't detect any problems, if you run a scan on the same files using Malwarebytes, that product will find and recognize a virus, and yet Kaspersky does not. It seems that things can get through the detection system. It's not completely secure. 

The cloud isn't as scalable or robust as it needs to be. It doesn't handle the number of users we have very well. We have 1,500 users on the cloud.

It seems this particular solution is dated and needs to change to new requirements.

The technical support is good for the most part. However, I contract the solution with other partners. It's not technical support within Kaspersky. I contact my vendor and they give me support. The support requests don't go to Kaspersky, the company. It's going to another company, our vendor.

We are also using Malwarebytes, and they tend to catch viruses that Kaspersky misses.

We did not find the implementation process complex. The setup was easy. It was mostly straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process.

More or less, this is how long it took: the consult was about four hours and the deployment of the client for 1,500 users was more or less three weeks.

We are customers and end-users. We use a vendor that has assisted us with Kaspersky.

I'd advise those considering this or any other solution is to get data from the companies themselves and to do a good evaluation of the solution. They need to check how good viruses are covered and how often updated happen. Kaspersky needs to do more, for example, in this area.

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten. We've mostly been happy with it, although there is some more work that needs to be done.

It doesn't slow down your machine's speed for the end user which is why we chose Kaspersky. It's performing great.

We used to have a lot of phishing attacks and all these kind of things for end users so we decided that we needed endpoint security. We evaluated some solutions and found that Kaspersky is the most appropriate in terms of endpoint security and the speed of the user machine. The encryption is a major factor from our end. 

The encryption is the most valuable feature.

There should be some AI involved. We already have machine learning involved in recent releases but machine learning should be more enhanced in the upcoming versions.

The logs should be more simplified and more interactive for the end user. These are the areas I feel they need to improve on.

Stability is very good as of now. Kaspersky has some cool features that every organization needs to adopt as far as endpoint security is concerned.

I've had a good impression of the scalability. 

Our first point of contact for support is from our partners. We mostly deal with them. 

We have multiple criteria when choosing a solution. First of all the scalability of the solution is the main criteria for me, then the technical support, especially customer service. Lastly, the ease of use is important for us. 

The initial setup was quite easy. We only needed some material that was available online and there wasn't any issue when installing Kaspersky. It was quite easy, a normal IT person can do it.

We evaluated two or three vendors before choosing Kaspersky. We chose Kaspersky because of the impact of endpoint machines. Usually, endpoint security software hurts the speed of the user's system while running scans but Kaspersky does not. Another reason we went with Kaspersky is because of the cost. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. An eight because of the ease of usability, the deployment is easier than other solutions and because the artificial intelligence is more stable than other solutions and finally, because of the scalability. 

Kaspersky will not be a headache for your IT team and it will not hurt the overall performance of the end user by hurting the speed of their machine. It is quite simple to implement and manage.

I use this solution for my personal machines; my laptop, MacBook, as well as the devices of other family members. I buy about five to seven licenses every couple of years and I mainly use them to protect my end points. In my work, I'm the chief of Information Security and a customer of Kaspersky. 

I like that this solution is pretty easy to use and also that it gives me some kind of granularity about the things I want to configure. I can also specify the level of protection I want for the devices, especially for MacBook and Windows devices.

I think improvements could be made around the upgrade. The process for upgrades is very slow. It usually takes about five to 10 minutes to work with the database of the solution. 

As a cyber security professional, I would love to see more analytic capability in this solution. The ones I do see in solutions such as CrowdStrike or other commercial products, would also be better in more detail. 

I've been using this solution for about six years. 

This is now a very stable solution, they have made a lot of improvements in the last years. Prior to that, I installed the solution many years ago and it crashed the computers.

I think the scalability is fine. We have five to seven users at home. 

I think I've used technical support two or three times. They've been good. 

The initial setup is very straightforward - slow but straightforward. Deployment takes about an hour per device. 

I would definitely recommend this solution. 

I would rate this solution a 10 out of 10. 

Endpoint Security's most valuable feature is its heuristic analysis. This heuristic approach means that it learns from its past experiences. It is the most valuable feature they have. This contributes to dealing with ransomware, detection, and early mitigation actions.

We do high profile work, meaning agent analysis. Sometimes users complain that we can't access a particular website. A big improvement would be allowing us to reconfigure the agents and change what to whitelist for a specific user. If the user is not happy with the configuration and is being blocked from certain sites, we should be able to reconfigure the monitoring mechanics to make it more flexible. In other words, we should be able to monitor what is vulnerable and critical in order to assess access to a particular website.

Additionally, it would be helpful if they could provide us with a tech report generation mechanism.

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for one year.

We have three people in our team dedicated to ongoing security management with Kaspersky Endpoint Security.

Yes, I have been in touch with support. Our issues are handled by the global support. I am satisfied with them. They are good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It takes about two or three weeks to deploy.

As I mentioned, we have allocated three people to manage the solution. That way, if someone in the team is unavailable another person can manage customer queries and management issues.

Kaspersky is actually not the most perfect product in the industry. There are many other products available depending on your purposes. Defining your purpose is the most important thing when deciding what product to implement. For middle management, it might be Endpoint Security. It is the customer's call. Customers must evaluate the scope of their business needs before implementation.

One a scale of one to ten, I would rate Kaspersky Endpoint Security a seven.

We use this as part of our security solution.

I like the patching and the way the ports are used.

The security is very good, compared to some other products.

The notifications are good.

I would like to see enhancements made with respect to the administration. We have found that when we push the installation from the server to the rest of the clients, some systems pick it up automatically and continuously maintain them, whereas other systems do not. In these cases, we have to manually install, and moreover, we still cannot manage them from the administration end. If this break in the link between the administration and the clients can be fixed then it would be better.

I have been using Kaspersky Endpoint Security for a few years.

Kaspersky is relatively stable, although I have experienced one problem. I had noticed at one point that the icon was grey and did not show any colors. I then checked the protection features and only one out of ten was active, which should not have been the case. At that point, we uninstalled and reinstalled the software, and it fixed it.

It is easy to scale the platform. We have licenses for two servers at the moment.

The technical support from Kaspersky is good.

The company started with Kaspersky and has stayed with it since then.

The initial setup is easy and it can be deployed in a few minutes.

In general, this is a good product and I recommend it. My only complaint with it has to do with the administration problems.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.