Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Reviews

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is used for protection against threats.

The reporting in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should improve. The solution has limited features.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for approximately three years.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is stable.

The scalability is good.

My team did the implementation of the solution.

This solution is part of an enterprise license we have.

There are a lot of other products on the market that have better features.

If you have a mid-sized organization, the solution works well. However, in a large size organization, there are challenges.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a seven out of ten.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is integrated into Microsoft Windows and is used for system protection.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been secure and there is zero maintenance required because it updates with Microsoft Windows.

The solution can be more user-friendly.

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

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have 30 users using the solution in my organization.

The solution has no installation as it comes with Microsoft Windows.

I do not have to purchase antivirus solutions anymore because Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is integrated into Windows and comes free.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is endpoint protection. In general, we use it to protect our devices, rather than using third-party software. 

This solution is deployed on-prem. 

The most valuable feature is that it comes with the package, so there is no additional installation of third-party software. It's also easy to use. 

Microsoft Defender could be improved with features more like the McAfee ePO. It would be better if I had a console to get all the information for my endpoints. Maybe this is too much for it, but it would be better if it could handle those non-signature-based malicious codes or viruses. In the future, more and more non-signature-based activities or viruses will appear, which you can see in the market with software like CrowdStrike or other products that target non-signature-based attacks. 

There are two groups: one is signature, which means that people know it, and the other is non-signature, which means that these are abnormal activities unknown to people. If Defender could also handle those non-signature-based attacks or abnormal activities, it would be better. 

I have been using Microsoft Defender for one or two years. 

This solution is quite stable. In our opinion, it's similar to those signature-based antivirus software, and almost at the same level. 

There are about five or six users of Microsoft Defender in my organization, because we are not very big. Other people and other teams like to have different end device software. 

We have a support contract with Microsoft, so we have a ticket system where we can pass questions to them. These things are handled by the help desk people, though, not me. 

It's not difficult to install Microsoft Defender. I don't remember how much time it took, but the process is easy. 

We pay a yearly license for Microsoft Defender. We also have a support contract with them. 

I wish that Microsoft Defender had a feature like McAfee's ePO, where I could have a console to get all the information for my endpoints. I also evaluated CrowdStrike because it can target non-signature-based attacks.  

I rate Microsoft Defender an eight out of ten. I would recommend it to others, but it depends on whether they have their own policy for deploying antivirus products. It's good for some users who have some preferences—who need to follow their security policy or who have some budgeting issues. 

We use it for antivirus. You can use it for malware and Zero Trust. Some people use it for fact-checking too. I can also use it with Intune, which is good. 

We deploy Microsoft Defender on all kinds of devices, including Microsoft, iOS, and Mac.

Auto-remediation: When the product sees malware, it resolves the issue immediately. This protects the machine.

I like the tamper protection. For example, if I buy a notebook with Windows 10 and put Microsoft Defender on it, then I can activate the tamper protection. This keeps people from entering the machine, encrypting it, and changing passwords.

Microsoft Defender is fully integrated with Azure Sentinel. In addition, GPO can be connected with Microsoft Defender and Azure AD.

It needs to improve the cybersecurity for lateral movements. For example, when a hacker tries to enter a machine, they try to get the password by doing a lateral movement. 

With Windows 10, version 18.0.3, I couldn't see the documentation to open the ports. If you don't open the ports, then the machine can't communicate with the console.

I like its stability a lot.

You push out all the devices that you want. There is no limitation beyond money and licenses.

In the past, I have used McAfee and Kaspersky. 

I only work with Microsoft products right now. It integrates well with other products. I also work with Microsoft Defender for Identity.

The deployment process is not difficult because Microsoft Defender comes with Windows 10. You just right click, then it connects you with Azure. 

There are other processes that can be connected, e.g., Microsoft Download Center.

I implement Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. It takes me one or two days to design Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. It is easy to do this, and the more you implement, the easier it gets over time.

Sometimes, when I change the configuration, I have to wait six to eight hours.

It is so expensive. It isn't cheaper than McAfee or other solutions.

I prefer Microsoft Defender for Endpoint instead of McAfee, Kaspersky, and other products.

I would rate this solution as 10 out of 10.

I primarily use it for myself and my businesses as a protection solution.

The most valuable feature is the protection given via the antivirus.

The solution needs to improve its ransomware. It's not so good. It could also use some general performance optimization for the computers the solution operates on, to ensure it does not slow down the devices.

The solution is stable.

The solution is easily scalable. I'm always trying to increase the usage to maximize the capabilities of the product offering. As soon as new capabilities appear I will expand usage to include them. In terms of physical expansion to other devices, I already have the solution on all of my devices.

I've never needed to contact technical support.

I did previously use a different solution, but it was more convenient to work with Defender. I wanted to use the same provider. I'm using the Microsoft operating system and Microsoft applications. It seemed to be a logical step. 

Defender is integrated into the operating system. It's integrated with everything. You don't have to spend time analyzing what you have to do to be sure that the integration is okay between the security tool and all the other apps. This, from my point of view, is the main advantage.

Initially, a few years ago, the setup was not so easy. Now, with Windows 10, it's automatic. It's already within the system, so now we don't have to worry. Initially, before Windows 10, we had to install it. It was not so complicated, but a bit more complicated than now where you don't have to do anything at all. Originally, the deployment took about 10-15 minutes. You only need one person for deployment and maintenance. With the 2000 version, maintenance is almost nonexistent. You just follow up and approve the updates. It's a fraction of the time.

I implemented the solution myself.

You have a standard licensing fee. As far as I know, there are no other costs above and beyond this.

We are using the public cloud deployment model of the solution.

I would recommend the solution. I would rate it ten out of ten.

Our primary use case centers around blocking viruses on my personal laptop.

I'm working as a private contractor. In this regard, you can say this tool ensures I'm working with a product that gets updated regularly without me having to remember to do it. Since it's a Microsoft product, I'm confident that it requires a low use of system resources. The benefit of that being that my computer isn't constantly being drained.

One of the most valuable features of this product is the ability to "set it and forget it." I don't go in and make any changes to the settings. Another value add is the size of the user base, which is fairly large because it's a free MS product. I would imagine that it would be quite competitive since a blacklisting solution such as this is only as good as the threat intelligence it receives. I'm pretty sure that if the tool discovers something foreign and malicious it will upload that information back to Microsoft. The value of the tool is inherent within the size of the user base, which is fairly large because it's a free product by a trusted company.

I'm sure the premium product has extra features, like listing questionable websites. Defender is just an antivirus product. It would be nice to have a paid upgrade that would provide additional screening of the day-to-day activities.

I haven't had any noticeable issues with it. It's quite stable.

It's very easy to set up. With admin rights, it really is very straightforward. All you need to do is install the tool and then download the definitions. 

Deployment was just basically downloading from Microsoft. It was very straightforward.

I'm currently evaluating the performance of Defender against third-party antivirus software products to see if I should continue with third-party products or just use Windows Defender.

My additional advice would be to create a test user group, deploy the software to those test users and then monitor those users as part of a log management operations center and run comparisons over several months. Comparing those users, against other users perhaps using a third-party product, like Symantec, would allow for calculation of performance and progress metrics. Based on that, a decision can be made as to whether to deploy the software across the organization or not.

I'd give this tool a rating of 8 out of 10. It's got good detection rates, low on system resources, doesn't interfere or hamper workflows, and it's easy to use.

My primary use case is as an end-user solution. It helps protect the computer against viruses and malware. It has a firewall option and offers basic protection for an end-user and a home user. If you are a home user, it's a very good solution for you.

The most valuable feature is that it is easy to use; the solution is already there when you load Windows. It's effective against most types of infection, and the firewall is perfect for protection.

One area where the product could be improved is that I don't think it can be used all by itself, if you are working with a business. If you are using the laptop as a business, you need to add an extra protection with this solution.

The solution could be more friendly for end-users, with different type of scans or scheduled scans for it. The antivirus database update could be a cloud protection instead of waiting for the database to be updated every now and then.

I have been using the solution since it launched, around 2014.

The solution is stable and working fine for me. I haven't faced any problem with it.

The solution is scalable.

I haven't had a crash or problem with Microsoft Defender, so I haven't needed to contact the support.

The solution is a Windows feature, so it's already there when I launch the operating system.

The solution is free with Windows.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. As it's a free solution, it doesn't have a lot of features like paid versions. If you are a home user or don't have a paid version of any other antivirus, Defender will be fine for you.

We primarily use the solution for cloud security. It was used for threat detection and endpoint to endpoint.

The product can be used for organizations that use Microsoft as their primary security defender and need zero-day threat protection. It's good for companies that want to make sure there are no threats or attacks on their information.

It's one of the best antiviruses on the market.

The solution could be even more secure and provide an even higher level of security.

I've been using the solution for more than two months at this point.

We have a team of up to four or five people that use the solution.

I've never contacted technical support or worked with them on any issues. 

The installation is very straightforward and the deployment is quick as well. 

While I recall the deployment not taking too much time, I don't remember the exact amount, as it was already installed by my team here. It was likely less than ten minutes.

You only need roughly four people, at a maximum, to install the solution. You need one good manager and four or five engineers.

I can handle the installation process myself. 

In order to use the solution, a base subscription is required.

We are always using the latest version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations.