We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"Some of the valuable features I have found are the online documentation of the solution is well organized and thorough. I like the simplicity of bypass and the visualization of the active components."
"The solution is extremely scalable."
"We can access computers remotely if we need to."
"What I like the most about it is the dynamic grouping, where you get to group endpoints based on setup criteria. That's pretty cool. I like the simplified policy management and simplified white-listing process."
"The threat analysis functionality is good."
"I like its reporting."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"I like its protection very much. It protects and allows us to lock the environment pretty tightly. Nothing that is not approved through Carbon Black can run in the environment. There is no default. Everything goes through Carbon Black Protect, and everything has to be first approved. Every software is considered to be guilty before prove innocent."
"They offer the whole package. Remote monitoring and management (RMM) is included with it, which is pretty nice. They also have Windows patching and third-party patching. It was easy to use for protection. The containment engine was pretty nice for securing our environment."
"It's a very easy-to-use product."
"It really protects and does its job. It totally blocked every attack attempt, and no attack attempt was successful."
"The most valuable feature is the management of end-user machines."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"The technical support is very slow."
"...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The application control can be improved. It should also have an automatic update of the agents."
"With the on-prem one, the bug has been reported by the community in early January or February, something like that, at the beginning of the year, and it's still not addressed. They have released two versions since then, and yet neither of them addresses this specific issue."
"It could be a bit complicated. You have to be very familiar with Carbon Black to understand what it is doing and why it is doing. I would like to have more explanations and simplification in the user interface. It would be good to get help and see more explanations. It should tell us that a software is blocked and the reason for it. It would be good to be able to build chains in terms of what caused what, what worked, and what caused an issue. We are now moving from Carbon Black to Cortex XDR. While choosing antivirus software, we were also looking at Carbon Black because it also has an antivirus package, and it is next-generation, but we were told that Carbon Black doesn't support firewalls. We have Palo Alto firewalls. We would have chosen this solution if it supported firewalls, in particular next-generation firewalls, but unfortunately, it doesn't. Therefore, we decided on Cortex XDR because it integrates with Palo Alto firewalls."
"This solution could have greater granular control on how certain applications work."
"The solution needs better overall compatibility with other products."
"The EDR portion could be better. I'm not a big fan, but it works."
"Its compatibility can be improved. It did crash a server during deployment, which is not something that I want to happen. Its deployment should also be easier. The whole deployment cycle needs to be simplified. It is an enterprise solution, and to set it up right now, you have to be an expert."
"In the past, we've seen some stability issues in the latest version releases. We tend to hang back one version just to make sure issues are fully resolved to avoid user disruption."
"The licensing fees are high. The company should work to try to lower them for the customer."
"They need to enhance the performance of the agents. Currently, the performance is going low when the agent starts a full scan. The agent is consuming a lot of resources while scanning. When there are a lot of documents to check, it slows down the endpoint. This is the only thing that worries me about Comodo, but this issue is also there in other products. It is missing DLP, and I know that they are working on adding some data loss prevention capabilities. They have added some capabilities, but these capabilities are not yet mature. I hope they will enhance these capabilities because it is important to prevent the data from going out from inside. We are protected from the outside, but we also have to be protected from the inside out."
"They need to just modernize the infrastructure with something that is next-generation. We have recently moved to SentinelOne. It had been doing good for us for a while, but we needed something modern with new technology."
"Their support is not very good because they are very late to reply."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
"Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing."
"We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"We have branches, we have different companies, but we cannot buy less than 100 licenses. This does not make sense to me... It should be more flexible. I can understand their saying, "Okay, to be a customer you need 100," but to add on to that number it should be something very straightforward. If I need to add five, for example, I shouldn't need to add 100."
"It's reasonable in price"
"The pricing [is] more or less the same as other similar solutions."
"The price for the solution is completely at government level, meaning one which is very high."
"The price of this product should be lower."
"It was about 35 or 40 bucks per year for the endpoint."
Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.
CB Defense is an industry-leading next-generation antivirus (NGAV) and endpoint detection and response (EDR) solution. CB Defense is delivered through the CB Predictive Security Cloud, an endpoint protection platform that consolidates security in the cloud using a single agent, console and data set. CB Defense is certified to replace AV and designed to deliver the best endpoint security with the least amount of administrative effort. It protects against the full spectrum of modern cyber attacks, including the ability to detect and prevent both known and unknown attacks. CB Defense leverages the powerful capabilities of the CB Predictive Security Cloud, applying our unique streaming analytics to unfiltered endpoint data in order to predict, detect, prevent, respond to and remediate cyber threats. In addition, CB Defense provides a suite of response and remediation tools, including Live Response, which allows security personnel to perform remote live investigations, intervene with ongoing attacks and instantly remediate endpoint threats. For peace of mind, CB Defense customers can also leverage CB ThreatSight, Carbon Black’s managed threat alert service, to validate alerts and uncover new threats.
Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection (AEP) delivers patent-pending auto-containment, where unknown executables and other files that request runtime privileges are automatically run in a virtual contain that does not have access to the host system's resources or user data.
Carbon Black CB Defense is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 21 reviews while Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is ranked 35th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 4 reviews. Carbon Black CB Defense is rated 7.6, while Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Carbon Black CB Defense writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection writes "Flexible, easy-to-use, and scales well". Carbon Black CB Defense is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Carbon Black CB Response and Secureworks Red Cloak Threat Detection and Response, whereas Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is most compared with Sophos Intercept X, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne and McAfee Endpoint Security. See our Carbon Black CB Defense vs. Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.