Symantec Endpoint Encryption Reviews

My use case is to protect my assets and information, and to have visibility over user activity.

The initial setup was easy. 

The UI could be improved.

I've been using this solution for six months. 

It's a stable product but I have to search for anything I need.

The technical support could be improved, it took a long time to get tickets resolved. 

Negative

The initial setup was easy but we had an issue with the product. We used a consultant for implementation and deployment took around two months. The senior system engineer and the managing director used this solution.

We paid an annual license fee. 

We had approximately 600 users but we migrated to a different solution because of some issues. I can't recommend this product. 

I rate this solution six out of 10. 

We use Symantec Endpoint Encryption for security.

The solution is easy to use.

Symantec Endpoint Encryption can improve by being more secure.

I have been using this solution for approximately 10 years.

Symantec Endpoint Encryption is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have approximately 20,000 people in my organization using this solution.

I have not needed to contact support because we have not had any issues.

The installation is easy.

Our internal IT team of approximately 250 did the implementation of the solution. Additionally, they do the maintenance for the solution.

There is a license required for this solution.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate Symantec Endpoint Encryption a nine out of ten.

I don't manage the solution. I don't manage the console and everything. However, password recovery is the best, the easiest part. 

The solution is pretty stable.

If it could offer seamless upgrades to seamlessly do the switching that would be great. That's the pain point here now. The setup time takes quite a while sometimes. The encryption, once you install a new computer, takes a few hours to encrypt. From our testing, it feels like nothing is being restored, however, it's actually running in the background. 

We'd like to switch from Symantec due to the fact that the switching part is a pain. If we want to switch our Windows it will be a pain to do that. We have thousands of machines. It would be a hassle if you have to switch every time to do that.

The initial setup is a bit complex.

I've worked with the solution for quite some time already. I was using it before I transferred to this current team. I'm not sure for how long it has been at this point. I've used it for some time already.

The stability seems to be okay. It works as it was designed to. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

I can't speak to the scalability. We have about 2,000 people on the solution currently, however, I cannot speak to the scaling process or if we have ever attempted to scale it. We likely won't increase usage.

In terms of technical support, we don't really engage with them. There are not many issues with it. It's just the Windows update that gives us issues. That's the only issue, the main issue. Other than that, there hasn't been a reason to engage with them directly and therefore I can't speak to their level of responsiveness or knowledgeability.

The Symantec setup is a bit complex. It takes time. It is simple, but it takes time. It also takes a bit longer when creating the profiles at first.

It is my understanding that we handled everything in-house. I do not recall using an integrator or consultant.

We pay on a yearly basis. The cost isn't much, however, if we switch to BitLocker there may be some cost savings there as well.

We are currently considering a switch to Bitlocker due to the issues we are facing with updates. It could potentially save us money as well. BitLocker has different types of cost charging depending on which model you choose. We are in the process of evaluation right now.

We are a customer and end-user.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. It's not the latest one. I understand the latest one will be able to go page Windows - which we also partnered with. The problem is not all our machines are on the latest version. We are looking to see if we switch to the latest one. In a few years, Microsoft will likely change to a new version again. Then we will be having the same problem again.

It's best to align with Microsoft so that we do not have to do so many changes. Not catching up with Windows is also a risk currently due to the Microsoft Edge issue now. Without the latest Windows version, we cannot use the latest Edge version.

I'd rate the solution at a five out of ten overall. It works okay, however, the switching part and initial setup make it an undesirable option for us.

We use the solution for endpoint protection. It can help us protect our information.

The product is stable.

It's a scalable enough product.

The solution is easy to use. We use it quite a lot - and not just Endpoint Encryption - we use a lot of their solutions.

The installation process is pretty straightforward.

The only challenge which I see is that they are no longer the major market player. They have too high of a price tag. That's why they're losing the market share.

Technical support needs to be better. They need more skilled techs and they need to be faster at responding. 

We've been using the solution since 2003.

The stability of the product is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We have three or four clients on the solution currently. 

We have 40,000 Symantec endpoints in all of our banks.

Previously, once the ticket is open and assigned, it was very good. However, now, based on the transition to Symantec, there's a lapse that brings a bad name to the product. It's not as good as it used to be. They likely use some market share between the bad customer service and the high pricing.

In Pakistan, they do not handle the troubleshooting directly. It's contracted out. If you do finally reach a proper engineer from Broadcom, they tend to know what they are doing and can help. However, it takes a long time to get a proper engineer.

The installation is pretty straightforward, especially for an engineer. It's a process that just flows. It's pretty easy whether it's deployed on-premises or in the cloud. 

The licensing is pretty high. They need to fix it so that they are more competitive.

The customer needs to pay the cost of the license on a yearly basis. 

In terms of encryption, we do deployments in the region on behalf of Symantec. We have Symantec DLP for almost 20,000 plus users. We have the messaging gateway from Symantec and we have SSL certification and issue verification from Symantec. We also have Blue Coat from Symantec, which we keep selling to our clients.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for endpoint Security for the Government of the Ministries that we are employed in.

Their cloud features such as Cloud Endpoint security, ransomware modules, malware, and other modules are very effective.

The main concentration has been on upgrading the cloud version with new features and cloud security. 

They are mostly providing the cloud version and stopping with the on-premises version. I think that they should improve the on-premises version to include the manageability and simplicity that is available on the cloud. This should all be included in the on-premises version.

Currently, the on-premises version is tricky and difficult. 

They should be looking at the on-premises deployment and simplifying it.

In the next release, I would like to see the uninstall feature be more advanced.

This is a stable solution. It is more stable than most solutions.

Even with other solutions, the PC slows down. All those things are there, but it needs to be worked out on a combination. The Endpoint security system always slows down the PC. For the most part, it has been good.

I can't comment on the scalability because I have not deployed on more than one thousand endpoints per customer.

We have five to six customers with each having six to seven hundred endpoints. Our customers' IT supporters have outsourced us.

The technical support is good. When you submit a tag, the support you receive is very good.

Previously were using Trend Micro Endpoint. We chose Symantec Endpoint because it is better.

Compared to cloud the initial setup is complex.

The cloud version is easy to set up. It's one gateway and you connect it and it's pretty much a configured service on the cloud.

Generally, the deployment takes a month for seven hundred endpoints per customer. This includes installing endpoints for customers.

To frame the policy and set up on-premises, it's approximately a week.

The cloud implementation is straightforward. We were able to implement it ourselves, but for the on-premises version, we needed support.

I would recommend cloud implementation, rather than on-premises if it is possible.

The on-premises deployment model will lead you to have errors.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Symantec Endpoint Encryption is used for data encryption to protect data on the local drive and the hard disk.

I haven't fully utilized the product because I am just in the first testing phase, so I haven't explored it.

In the future, the solution needs network folder encryption that can be done on Macintosh. The solution presently doesn't let network folder encryption be done on Macintosh.

I have been using Symantec Endpoint Encryption for a month. I have used it for testing purposes. I can't say if I am using the solution's latest version since I handle different modules with a top priority for encryption. As a distributor, we sell the product.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I am more familiar with the encryption functionalities provided by Trellix.

The solution’s installation was easy.

The solution's deployment could be done in a couple of minutes.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

The solution requires maintenance, especially on the software update part.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use case is just endpoint protection. It is the basis of our whole infrastructure for security staff.

It ensures that we are kept on the same page of the latest version, as updates are being rolled out.

We can automate the solution. It is very simple, and we can handle remote people very easily.

The management console: Being able to quickly control who sees what, ensures we are on the latest version, and up-to-date.

We now have visibility on our metrics.

I would like them to have integration with a wider range of non-Symantec products.

It is the industry standard product with the common set of features, but we would like extra features added on.

It is pretty stable.

We are a small company. We have had no issues with the scalability nor do we anticipate issues as we grow.

The product works best with large companies, but if you will be opening multiple branches (scaling up), the product may be a fit for you.

The technical support is very good and responsive.

I don't know what they had before because I am new to this role.

At first, the initial setup was a little complex. Once I understood what I needed to do, it became straightforward. So, initially, there was a bit of a learning curve. For example, I needed to understand that I wasn't overpaying for the number of seats that we needed based on how we expected to scale up for that number of employees that we had.

We upgraded to the latest version within the last six months.

It can be expensive. However, if you plan to scale or are at a large enterprise company, this product could be what you need.

I used to work at Symantec, so the team chose the solution based on that. There wasn't a rigorous evaluation process. Though, I am sure that we also looked at Palo Alto Networks.

Give it a serious look.

Our security team is more on the immature side rather than the mature side, as we build thing out. This automated solution puts us at the base level where we can get better. We went from not being happy with what we had to this product.

The primary use case is to protect from data loss prevention in my company.

It has reduced the number of incidents related to the loss of information.

The precision that it has to identify all my assets.

I would like them to improve their support.

The stability is really good and nice. We don't have any issues with the stability, in particular. 

You can get any size or use it in any size organization. So, scalability is not a problem.

It's a bit difficult to get good support. Their response times are really bad. I don't like it.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was fast, easy, and not intrusive on my company.

Symantec did the deployment.

This solution has helped to increase staff productivity.

The licensing costs yearly are $5000.

We had three vendors on our shortlist. I choose this vendor because it was a leader at that time, and it still is the leader right now. 

I am happy with it and not looking to change vendors.

Try to look at many vendors. There are a lot of papers about solutions, especially this one. So, it's really nice. 

I started my security program four years ago, and we now have a mature security program. We added this solution as the last part of our security program.