Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Reviews

I'm a consultant and I don't use these solutions. We sell them and we do research for sales purposes.

I don't use it explicitly. Rather, it's there on my laptop filtering viruses. It's there to protect my laptop.

I have had a few minor issues on my laptop but nothing really big.

I would like to see fewer pop messages and alerts. 

It's disturbing when you have that many alerts. 

Even though it shows you it's working, I don't really need to see it. If it was running in the background and never showing that would be perfect for me.

It's been a part of my laptop by default for two to three years.

I am probably not using the latest version. I don't follow the best practices in terms of updates. I may have an outdated product.

It's stable. There are no issues that I know of. 

My laptop has been working.

As it is for my personal use, this is an area that is not necessary for me to explore.

I am the only person using it.

I am a part of a tiny organization with a tiny team that is autonomous.

I have not contacted technical support.

I have used Symantec Endpoint Protection. It was the standard choice in my previous company.

From what I remember, the initial setup was transparent. I haven't had to deal with it.

I would say that the initial setup was straightforward.

It's included with the Windows Operating System, I don't pay for any licensing fees.

I would recommend using this solution. I haven't had any issues and it's been working fine for me.

I plan to continue using this product as long as it is not causing any problems.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution and we also implement it for customers. We mainly use it for its anti-malware and threat protection capabilities. If a client comes to us who uses Office 365, then we suggest this solution.

At the moment we have between 10 to 50 customers.

We definitely plan to keep using this solution. We're currently just pushing out all other solutions because they're not integrated and they have additional deployment costs. The only thing which is a bit peculiar is that you need to convince the customer that you're not talking about an antivirus solution. If we do, then they end up comparing things that are incomparable.

The primary advantage is that you don't need to install it. It's included in the Windows 10 delivery.

It's part of the Microsoft 365 suite, so it's integrated. We also use it for collaboration with other components within the suite. These two things are the most important for us at the moment.

Some integration components for Mac should be added. We use both Windows 10 desktops and Mac desktops, but presently, the Mac component is still lagging a bit behind. However, I think this is a temporary case.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for roughly one year.

On Mac, it's quite unstable and unusable; however, it's very stable for Windows. We're content with what it does and how it works.

It's on the cloud, so scalability is not an issue.

We've had no problems with customer support.

There's no installation to be done on the device itself, so it's quite easy. Configuration takes roughly two to three days.

Our company acts as both a consultant and integrator. 

Licensing options vary. Some customers buy it as an enterprise agreement and pay yearly. Others buy it as a CSP, so they pay per month. It completely depends on the customer's needs.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine. Some integration components on Mac should be improved. It should be more stable on Mac. If they fixed this, I would give it a rating of ten.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a basic endpoint protection solution. If you do not combine it with another solution then you will leave yourself open to vulnerabilities. I used Microsoft Defender for Endpoint in conjunction with other solutions, such as Cylance.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should have more transparency. In the latest edition of Windows, Windows 11, it is a compulsory requirement to connect to a Microsoft account, which in turn has implications for Defender. This should be removed.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for a few years.

I have not called Microsoft technical support.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comes pre-installed in Microsoft Windows.

The solution comes as part of Microsoft Windows. 

I wouldn't call Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a solution, I'd call it part of a solution. I don't think I would be going around recommending it.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint an eight out of ten.

I primarily use Defender for web protection.

I've been using Defender for over ten years.

Defender is stable enough and is competitive with the other products in the market.

The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight.

The initial setup was not complicated. 

We implemented using a Microsoft team.

Defender is available on a yearly subscription.

Defender is an ideal solution for web security. I would rate it as seven out of ten.

I am using the solution for personal data protection.

The main features of this solution are that it handles everything by itself and is well integrated.

There could be an increase in security for the solution.

I have been using this solution for a couple of years.

The solution has been stable.

In my experience, the solution has been scalable.

There is no license needed, the solution comes with Microsoft Windows.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Defender Antivirus a nine out of ten.

Just as the name states, we use this solution to defend endpoints. 

We're actually in the process of moving away from this solution. We are beginning to use SentinelOne.

For me, It's just a standard malware and antivirus solution — nothing more, nothing less. 

I personally haven't experienced any pain points, but some of my coworkers feel that it isn't secure enough.

It would be nice if they could guarantee that we'll always be safe and secure with them. 

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for roughly four years. 

For me, this solution is both reliable and stable. 

I have never had to contact their technical support. 

The initial setup was straightforward. 

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is quite good. We haven't really experienced any issues with it.

I would recommend Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to other users. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. 

Our primary use for the solution is threat detection and response.

It's basically for security implementation, response planning capabilities and other security functions. Obviously, auditing, HR, requirements, legals, auditing, banking, and financial services all require a lot of the data that are generated and reported out of the platform.

The features that are most valuable for us are cloud analytics from the APT (Advanced Threat Protection) engine or quarantine, deletion, and removal. Basically, they work by web engine. Simply, it is proactive in resolving potential issues.

There are certain features that do have room for improvement. I think with the analytics engine they're looking at it from the desktop and the server perspective. I think the desktop engine should also include the script analytics — what executed, what's the power shelf or UI commands, or some form of Splunk regex. I know we don't have that functionality with a run-time analytics platform, but it's a JS (JavaScript) based one. So it would be good if they had a regex to JS converter.

The biggest problem is they need to take things out of preview. I know that they're developing on the platform service with the analytics engine, but so many services still rate it as a preview after 12 to 18 months, which is stopping adoption with businesses knowing that that solution could be filled and redirected at any time. So that delay is limiting technology to be able to be updated because they don't have to release all production support.

In the last 12 months, we've moved up to the Gartner Magic Quadrant report as a leading form of threat analysis. Obviously, the more clients that migrate to Cloud Services the more analytics platforms are picking it up. There are auto-resolutions and it's getting more cross-correlations between tendency. So we're getting a lot more APT (Applied Predictive Technologies) and IOC (Indicators of Compromise) data through which you can get a better response, better response times, automatic remediation tasks, reduce the amount of the alerts and false positives — that sort of thing. It's all really useful. It's scaling out on its own.

We get direct support. They're literally across the road from us. We've got multiple Microsoft engineers assigned to our contract as well, so we deal directly with their engineering teams.

The setup was simple and straightforward.

Here we SCOM (System Center Operations Manager) SCCM (System Center Configuration Manager) deployment for pushing out the agent's, done the deployment for the AIP (Azure Information Protection) scanners and load that unified data locally.

We consulted with Microsoft, but we're a full IT workhouse so we have qualified engineers that were coming off a three-year capability program to deliver all of those services.

As far as the amount of staff we use to support the solution, we have a lot of managed providers and different international SOC (Security Operations Center) teams and different agencies that manage a lot of the services. I would say that globally we would have probably about close to a hundred engineers working on the solutions full-time with cloud app development and Kubernetis and things like that.

We compared extensively between multiple services, everything from Azure, cloud service providers, identity providers, platform SaaS providers — we did all that before we sort of consolidated on certain technologies in different areas.

We're utilizing a lot of the services. There will be some future state planning goals, but we're taking a risk-averse assessment on the product. We're more controlled about how things like our customer member data protections, cryptography and those types of things are working. So we're doing still doing a little bit of assessment. I know it's got the ASD clearance rating and certain services, but that's based off the tenancy agreements.

I'd say the product rates about an eight out of ten as it currently stands.

You have to implement the product — there's no choice. You can't use the exchange online protection or the advanced analytics or obscure identity IP protection without the APT being installed on the endpoint. Otherwise you're not getting into threat intelligence or the actions. You're not going to get the full response plan or activities that occurred. You cannot deploy without APT being installed on the desktops and have a full, defined solution for unified labeling. That has to be deployed and tested for unstructured data for at least six months with the AIP (Azure Information Protection) scan that's deployed with APT.

Defender's endpoint protection is good.

I've been using Defender for less than one year. Defender is free for one year. Once that year is over, we will switch to Kaspersky.

Defender is stable. The performance is good.

In terms of scalability, I rate Defender 10 out of 10. 

I haven't dealt with Microsoft support for this product.

It's easy. Defender came pre-loaded on our computers.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint eight out 10. I would recommend it to others.