Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response Reviews

I use the solution to detect threats.

The security is good.

Symantec is a dead product. The product does not have any add-on features. The interface has many issues. There is no proper KB article to fix the error.

I have been using the solution for five years.

The solution is easy to install.

The product is cheap.

We have trial licenses for Trend Micro, Sophos, and Kaspersky.

People can use the tool. There are not many options, though. We are unable to log in or work in the trial version. We are unable to learn the features. Overall, I rate the solution a one out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for endpoint detection and response. We recommend the product to clients. 

The endpoint detection and response is good. 

The setup is pretty straightforward. 

It's easy to use.

The solution is stable.

Technical support has been decent. 

Pricing is reasonable. 

I'm not sure if there are any features that need to be added. 

We'd like them to continuously improve their security posture to ensure they can protect customers from future threats. While they are quite dynamic, they need to ensure they are detecting threats faster in the future to keep people safer. 

I've been using the solution for seven years. 

The solution is stable. It is reliable, and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I've never scaled the solution. However, it shouldn't be a problem to extend the solution. 

It can be used for bigger companies as well as small or medium-sized companies. 

Technical support has been good. They are helpful and responsive. 

I also recommend Crowd Strike to clients if they are looking for a cloud solution. 

It is easy to set up. The implementation is not overly complex. 

We help our customers implement and manage the product.

The pricing is fine. It's not overly expensive. 

I'm a managed security provider. We're like integrators with an operation management arm. 

I'd recommend Symnentec for on-premises deployments. If it is for the cloud, I would recommend Cloud Strike.

Each and every user has a different business case. This may be a good option, depending on the company's needs. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

The primary use case of this solution is for protection.

The most valuable feature is that the same agent can act as the endpoint detection and response agent. You don't need to deploy an additional agent. As you do with other solutions.

If you try to deploy a new solution you have to replace the existing agent with a new agent, but with Symantec, you can use the same agent.

Reporting is a major issue, as it is not user friendly. It's the biggest challenge we are facing. I have raised this issue multiple times.

With virus detection, if one OEM vendor is detecting the virus at 1:10 am, within 24 hours all others will detect it. For example, Symantec will detect the virus, then McAfee will detect it then Trend Micro, all within 24 hours, everyone will have it covered.

In the next release, I would like to see the option to customize the report as per our needs, and better reporting in general.

I have worked with all Symantec products. Detection and response is a new technology that they have come up with and I have been working with it for two years.

If the solution is updated regularly then there is no challenge with stability.

This solution is definitely scalable.

The technical support is very bad. It's been outsourced. The level one support does not have the expertise to support people properly, from a technical perspective. 

I'd say that the level of understanding has been reduced as a result of outsourcing to a third party.

Previously, I was working with Trend Micro. Before the detection and response were included, I would have recommended Trend Micro. However, Symantec Endpoint has now taken the lead.

Endpoint detection and response have not been developed into Trend Micro.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not complex. You will have to license it, then you are good to go.

If you try to establish the replication then you should plan it properly. If you do proper planning then it manages well. As an example, with one of my customers, I updated 3,000 machines that were in remote sites in less than a month's time.

The price is okay, but it really depends on the customer's requirements.

I am a user of Symantec as well as an admin with the Symantec support team. I was the technical support account manager and I would support other customers.

Symantec release updates two or three times per day. If you have a low bandwidth it will never get updated, although there are options to resolve this.

First, you have to decide on your requirements and what features you are looking for, then you can consider any endpoint detection and response solution.

There are good products on the market; there is one in particular that is cloud-based, where you don't need a single investment, but you will need to have good bandwidth. 

Before looking for any solutions the planning must be done.

Overall, this is a good product but it is still in the early stages and there are some improvements that need to be made.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is mainly used for endpoint protection against malware and other threats.

The most valuable feature of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is its ability to conduct large scans on the endpoints without affecting the network.

In the future, it would be nice to have playbooks in the tool, to allow for some of the common activities to be automated. For example, some of the scannings of the malware can be too manual for a specific device. Additionally, a vulnerability manager would be beneficial.

I have been using Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response for approximately three years.

The stability of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is good.

Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response scalability depends on the agents. You have to discover the devices. It's scalable, but it's not as flexible as one would like.

We have approximately 10,000 endpoints using this solution. We use the solution every day.

I rate the support from Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response a four out of five.

They have given quick resolutions to our questions.

I have not used other solutions. However, if you compare what Microsoft may provide to Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response, the integration with other systems, such as AD, Microsoft EDR solution treats it much better than Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response.

Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response advantages are the ease of use, quick introduction of new technicians, and it's much faster. It doesn't require a lot of training. In terms of usability, it's something that you can deploy and run quickly.

The initial setup of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response was not complex, it was easy.

We had access to the Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response consultant to assist us with the implementation.

I rate the price of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response a three out of five.

The more devices we have the more expensive it becomes, which is where the challenge is.

I rate Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response a seven out of ten.

Automation in Symantec ecosystem is very good. It's easy to maintain.

The solution could improve their service.

I have been using Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response for two years.

Stability is good.

Scalability is good. I rate the solution’s scalability a ten out of ten.

Support is good. I had a problem, but the support resolve the problem.

Positive

I evaluated WatchGuard, Palo Alto and Cisco.

The initial setup is easy.

The product is expensive.

It is a good product and functions for me. It is easy to install to the administration.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

In the past, we deployed for Government organizations and right now we are dealing with a financial institution that is considering implementing Symantec. We primarily work in the Middle East and Australia. We are Symantec partners and implement the solution for our clients. I'm a security engineer. 

I like the IPS , GIN and the user interface, they are good features and simple to use. In addition to that, I believe that Symantec is the only vendor that actually includes the deception technology component as part of SEP.

I think the network forensics feature could be improved. It's not part of SEP, but it's part of the package and I think that could be improved because we need the decryptor. Without  that you can't actually decrypt the SSL traffic going in the network. If the solution could be completely software-based, it would be a formidable product.

Symantec could include that as an additional feature, it's something that other solutions provide. Secondly, instead of just making it endpoint deception, they could make it network deception as well and that would make it a complete endpoint protection solution.

I've been using this solution for the last 12 months. 

The stability of the solution is fine. 

We haven't had any issues with scalability. Three months ago we put in a bid where they initially wanted 300 users, but then decided they wanted to scale up to 7,000 users. Symantec had no problem with that. It just requires preparation by taking into account the increased number of endpoints. 

Technical support is very good.

We used McAfee and Trend-Micro previously, but we didn't get many good reviews for the product. Once we switched to Symantec, the market responded well so we switched to pushing that. We depend a lot on market feedback and after speaking to a lot of cyber experts in the information security field, they said they wanted Symantec. It's pretty much based on market feedback. 

Deploying on-prem makes Symantec a very expensive product but if it's being deployed on cloud it's quite cheap. We lost a lot of bids when we proposed on-prem deployment because of the high cost. 

I would definitely recommend Symantec because the company provides great support from its engineers. Whenever we've had any issues, we give them a call and 10 or 20 minutes later, they make contact. They're also very good at helping us quote for tenders and they negotiate well. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

The solution is easy to deploy on both on-cloud and on-premises infrastructures.

The solution's price could be better. Presently, it is expensive for basic functionality. Also, they should make its UI more user-friendly. It takes time to find the policies and analyze their effects. They should add a customization option for policies. In addition, they should add more scanning features to it.

We have been using the solution for a year.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability as an eight.

We have around 150 solution users of the solution in our organization. It is scalable, and I rate its scalability as an eight.

The solution's customer service could be better.

Neutral

The solution's initial setup is straightforward. It takes a day to complete the process.

Our team of three executives deploys and maintains the solution.

The solution is expensive. I rate it as a five for pricing.

I rate the solution as an eight.

The solution is mainly used for antivirus. When clients don't want a heavy agent on their system, they like to use a solution like this. This isn't a signature-based approach which isn't very effective.

Symantec has been a leader in the space. The threat intel they gather is very good. 

They have a wide presence across the globe. They often are the first to pick up on threats and malware. 

They have the capability to address zero-day vulnerabilities. 

They do have managed service offerings.

It is easy to set up.

The solution can scale well.

It is stable.

The pricing is reasonable. 

They need to improve their cloud presence. They need to keep developing prevention. Many OEMs are focusing on the detection part only.  They need to address the challenge of gathering false positives.

We do not need any extra features. 

I've been using the solution for two years now. 

The stability and performance are great. It is very stable. I'd rate it nine out of ten in terms of reliability. 

The solution is very scalable. I'd rate it nine out of ten. It extends easily.

They are leaders in this entire segment, and they have a good understanding of malware and antiviruses is very strong and their presence across the globe is very robust.

We tend to work with medium-sized organizations.

I've used CrowdStrike and they have done a good job in terms of using AI and ML behavior-based analysis. No signature is required on endpoint devices. When you scan devices, it does not decrease user performance. 

The initial setup is very easy to set up. I'd rate the initial setup eight out of ten in terms of ease of the process. 

Most customers are on-premises, although they do now have a cloud option.

The deployment generally takes a few days. 

The pricing is pretty reasonable. I'd rate it nine out of ten. 

I am a reseller. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. Depending on the use case and the problem you are trying to solve, this is a decent solution.