Symantec Endpoint Security Reviews

The features I find the most valuable are the protection, the encryption, and the DLP.

The pricing is a little bit more expensive than other competitors, if you compare it to Kaspersky, for example, or McAfee.

The detection and response can always be improved.

I find the solution stable.

I found the solution scalable, and we faced no issue regarding that. We have approximately four thousand users.

The technical support is good. They are not the best, but they are good.

We were using Kaspersky but we decided to go for Symantec because Kaspersky was missing the DLP part.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I implemented myself using the help of the distributor.

This solution is more costly than some competing solutions.

I don't know what exactly could be inside the product to make it much more powerful. What I was looking for specifically at that time was the encryption part and the DLP and they were doing great.

Simply put, it is the one product that's an integrated holistic solution for the whole security suite for an endpoint. However, there is no such thing as a one hundred percent security solution.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use it as an antivirus.

For protection use only.

I would like to see fileless attack protection. Also, the version could be lighter.

It is stable.

No scalability issues.

We have not used it.

We switched to a new solution because we wanted more security and protection features.

The initial setup is straightforward. Though, make sure to check the system requirements before deploying it.

The vendors on our shortlist were Trend Micro and Kaspersky.

We are satisfied with it.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

• The support team
• Good reviews/reputation.

SONAR/Auto-Protect feature and Generic Exploit Mitigation: Can detect and prevent attacks that are exploring common software vulnerabilities. It monitors suspicious files that have behavior actions on memory, network, etc. The console and admin features are the main qualities.

In a large environment, it is a challenge to manage what areas can have specific rights or functions enabled or disabled, considering their needs. SEP had the opportunity to integrated Microsoft Active Directory structure into the SEP Admin console. Based on that, it was easier for me to apply specific policies for different business areas with different users. For instance: Enable USB rights only for C-level users/Disable SONAR feature for marketing team considering their needs.

Reports: It would be nice to have customized reports integrated on the main console with no additional DB server or BI server. Vulnerabilities: A vulnerability scan integrated with SEP would be important for the admin to understand the risk level they are facing and how to protect themselves...

Reports: SEP has built-in, on the console, many pre-configured reports
however, in a complexed environment, customers may would need customized
reports other than already provided by the console. In this case, it´s
possible to achieve them using an external data base and server. It would
be nice have a possibility to create customized reports without an external
server and data base, on the same SEP Admin console.

Vulnerabilities: It would be nice have on the SEP Admin console a feature
to measure the environment risk level using an OS and application
vulnerability scan where the administrator can analyze the risk, mitigate
the main risks, prioritized them and, over a Path Manager, correct them if
possible.

We have used this solution for six or seven years.

We had some issues during deployment. When doing a 40.000 McAfee migration nodes for SEP, I have faced challenges removing specific MacAfee features where SEP has no supportability. Compared to other vendors, like Kaspersky, they have scripts to remove all anti-virus solutions in the market before installing KL AV. And it is 100% possible to automate the job over the KL console.

Another challenge was customize all best practices vs. best protection for the company vs. not creating any performance impact on the customer.

Technical support is good. You can open tickets over international numbers, emails, or the website. If you open a ticket in your time-zone, you will work with a technical support representative in your local language. Otherwise, it will be in English.

We used Kaspersky and Bitdefender. We switched due to the company reputation, negotiation terms, commercial benefits, and technical results on the PoC.

The implementation was through a Symantec reseller. Considering the environment complexity, it is important to always plan, test, correct all errors, plan again, and attack departments with low risks, learn with the errors, adjust the plan, and move forward to next department.

Migrating a platform for a different one, most of the time, has a higher cost. However, considering the impact, risk , downtime, and principally, the low support quality provided that the oldest solution provided, were the main reason to start look forward for a newer one. These were the main reason that I migrated to Symantec. After a year of augmenting many open tickets and find internal customer satisfaction was really low, we convinced the board that it was time to migrate before having a huge impact for the business and company reputation.

Regarding the licensing, it was important negotiate a long contract to get a more attractive price, including advanced support in case of crisis.

Always try to include hours for the project in the budget. Always look for a specialized reseller who the vendor recognizes through a certified and approved reseller.

• Fast deployment, even for highly distributed companies with centralized IT management using a distributed architecture.
• Intuitive management GUI and very easy to learn.
• Excellent intrusion prevention features.

It has been a time saver for operational and reporting tasks related to key security controls.

SEP provided visibility on threats and security incidents.

SEP could improve on virus detection, specially on Zero-Day threats.

I have used this for five years.

We haven’t had stability issues. After finishing the product, customizing it worked as expected.

We have had no scalability issues at all. Actually, it is far more scalable than other similar products.

The technical support is acceptable.

We didn’t have a previous solution.

It was a very fast deployment using the client detection features and a transparent Active Directory integration.

We evaluated Trend Micro and Kaspersky.

I would advice choosing this product because it is very easy to deploy, has a performance host IPS and antivirus engine, and it provides a key source for security metrics.

• Server management
• Deployment
• Updates

It's made the work environment more secure, and reduced the number of malicious malware attacks.

Interaction with the product admin needs work. If Symantec could add a new feature which would allow the user to be nice every time the new definitions are/are not in place. Also, for machines which have connectivity problems and cannot download the new definitions for several days, I would suggest that they include them int one report and alert the system admin about them.

I've used it for four years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

There were issues, and they should ensure that the product updates automatically, especially in the DMZ.

There were no issues with the scalability.

8/10

6/10

It replaced System Center Endpoint Protection. I don't know why this was chosen, it was a corporate decision.

The initial set-up was clear, there were no issues.

We implemented it in-house.

We have better product management.

I am unaware of pricing.

When I joined my office, they were already using this product.

Ensure the connectivity between the server/agents.

Its response time is the most valuable. It is very quick.

It would be perfect if it is capable of detecting or checking ransomware.

I have been using this solution for five years.

It has been stable so far.

It is scalable. We have around 300 users who use this solution. We don't have any plans to expand its usage.

I am not the contact point for technical support, so I can't say anything about their technical support.

We have been using Symantec since I joined this company.

Its initial setup is complex. I don't really handle the configuration, but it seems that its configuration is a bit complex. Its menu is not easy.

Its price should be reasonable.

I would recommend this product because it is lightweight and consumes fewer resources.
We are satisfied with this product.

I would rate Symantec End-user Endpoint Security a seven out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is as an antivirus.

Some important features that are included are the built-in firewall and device control.

They are lacking the visibility that you get in a heuristical, next-generation AI product. 

In the next release, I would like to see any of the features the next generation antivirus and GAV products have, especially the heuristical and the behavioral analysis. It looks at the behavior of the endpoint, and that is how it identifies something that is not to your normal pattern of working.

I have been using it for a year.

There are no issues in rolling it out. Rather, it's more in reporting.

One time we had an issue with knowing a true endpoint time and the reporting. There was a conflict with what was in the console. I think that it was a glitch in verifying the device count.

I have not contacted technical support.

It's a great product at what it does, but it's lacking the advanced malware detection capabilities.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The feature I find most useful is the console for reporting.

The overall quality of the product needs to be improved because with the last session we had several issues with new versions. Also, the solution needs better protections.

The new version is not very stable with the latest version of Windows 10. We got a lot of crashes with this solution. 

We have about 1000 users.

It's very easy to scale.

I'm pretty satisfied with technical support.

The initial setup was quite complex. Even though it was complex, I was satisfied with the setup.

We used an integrator to implement the solution. 

We are using a pretty old solution for Symantec, so I would say the product is not quite up to date with new threats. Look for a new model of the solution. There is a new version, for example, that we don't use yet. Or you can look for a better solution for current threats.

I would rate this solution seven out of 10.