We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs Deep Instinct comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Deep Instinct and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
564,143 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned.""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.""The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features.""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.""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."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros →

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources.""The dashboard is customizable.""It's a nice product that's stable and scalable.""The initial setup is pretty easy.""The information the dashboard provides is very clear.""One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident.""Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution.""Cortex XDR can integrate the firewalls and determine the tendencies of the attacks. It's a new generation antivirus, with protection endpoints and detection response. It is very easy to use and everybody can operate the solution."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pros →

"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods.""The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users.""It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years.""This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product.""Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface.""The support is very good. They reply and respond very quickly."

More Deep Instinct Pros →

Cons
"...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.""The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications.""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.""The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on.""In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through.""The GUI needs improvement, it's not good.""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."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons →

"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized.""The installation should be easier and the Palo Alto pre-sales and sales teams should have more information on the product because they don't know what they are selling.""I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications.""It is not easy to sell Cortex XDR, not because it isn't a good tool. Its marketing needs to be improved.""The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others.""It's not an ideal choice for smaller businesses, as you need a minimum of 200 endpoints to even use the solution at all.""The connection to the internet has not performed as expected.""It would be good if they could make an exception for applications. Sometimes, it can be a bit of a challenge to make exceptions for certain applications that have been used as rogue."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Cons →

"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern.""Reporting on incidents needs improvement.""Some features are too resource intensive.""They have a manual, but it is not excessive.""The Deep Instinct client stops working when you have two servers and you add high availability or Windows Failover Cluster mode. It doesn't work in a clustered mode. I haven't yet had time to go back and talk with their support and get it fixed. It would be good if they can make the installation independent of an actual user. Currently, its installation is dependent on the actual user being logged in. For example, a computer has to be logged in for the installation to happen. If it is not logged in, then on the cloud platform, it is going to show that the client is offline. On the management side of the cloud platform, we would like to have the administrators segregated by logical entities. We have told them that on their cloud management platform, we would like to be able to segregate clients into different logical entities or organizations so that the administrators are able to manage only those entities that are within their designated organization.""If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."

More Deep Instinct Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
  • More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
  • "We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
  • "This is an expensive solution."
  • "Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
  • "Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
  • "The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
  • "Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
  • "It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
  • More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
  • "Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
  • More Deep Instinct Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
    564,143 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
    Top Answer: 
    Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
    Top Answer: 
    The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks.… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface… more »
    Top Answer: 
    The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they… more »
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Cisco AMP for Endpoints
    Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
    Learn More
    Overview

    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.

    Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the first threat detection and response software to combine both visibility across all types of data as well as autonomous machine learning analytics. Threat detection very often requires analysts to divide their attention among many different data streams. This platform unifies a vast variety of data flows, which allows analysts to assess threats from a single location. Users can now maintain a level of visibility that other threat detection programs simply cannot offer. This level of transparency lends itself to both quick identification of problems that arise and the equally quick development of a potential solution.

    Cortex XDR’s machine learning works on many different levels to detect and prevent threats. It is constantly scanning for threats and vulnerabilities. The solution can scan up to 5.4 billion IP addresses in three-quarters of an hour. This allows it to spot weak points in the system and notify administrators long before hackers can take advantage of vulnerabilities. Once the Artificial Intelligence (AI) discovers an issue or an area where an issue could potentially take place the system creates a log of the information and subsequently sends an alert to system administrators. The AI takes the information that it has gathered and uses it to assign threat levels to the issues that it detects. Following this, a human analyst will be assigned to manually assess the issue and deal with it accordingly. You can set it to automatically respond to the threat by isolating the issue while analysts investigate it.

    Benefits of Cortex XDR

    Some of Cortex XDR’s benefits include:

    • The use of advanced AI analytics, behavior analytics, and custom-made detection to detect advanced threats before they occur.
    • The ability to group similar threat alerts, reducing incoming alerts by as much as 98%. This allows analysts to avoid being overwhelmed by the volume of incoming alerts.
    • The ability to investigate threats as much as 8 times faster than would be possible with other software. The machine learning, when coupled with the unified data stream that Cortex XDR collects, significantly increases the ability to more quickly discover the root cause of a threat.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks software stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its ability to isolate threats while enabling them to be studied and the way that the software combines all of the data that it gathers into a single, more complete picture than other solutions offer.

    PeerSpot users note the effectiveness of these features. A network designer at a computer software company wrote, “The solution has a very helpful isolation feature. If any system gets compromised, with one click I can access the system and isolate it from other networks, and then go into further forensic investigation of the current threat without compromising anything else.”

    Jeff W., Vice President/CTO at Sinnott Wolach Technology Group, noted, “The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly.”



    Deep Instinct is the first and only company applying end-to-end deep learning to cybersecurity. Deep learning is inspired by the brain’s ability to learn. Once a brain learns to identify an object, its identification becomes second nature. Similarly, as Deep Instinct’s artificial deep neural network brain learns to prevent any type of cyber threat, its prediction capabilities become instinctive. As a result, any kind of malware, known and new, first-seen malware, zero-days, ransomware and APT attacks from any kind are predicted and prevented in zero-time with unmatched accuracy and speed anywhere in the enterprise – Network, endpoint, Mobile – enabling multi-layered protection. To learn more, visit: https://www.deepinstinct.com.

    Offer
    Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
    Learn more about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
    Learn more about Deep Instinct
    Sample Customers
    Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
    CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
    Information Not Available
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Government13%
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Reseller7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Comms Service Provider24%
    Computer Software Company23%
    Government7%
    Financial Services Firm5%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Consumer Goods Company11%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company24%
    Comms Service Provider22%
    Government7%
    Energy/Utilities Company4%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Comms Service Provider22%
    Government6%
    Financial Services Firm5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business39%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise51%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business46%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise34%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business36%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise48%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business64%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise18%
    Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Deep Instinct and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    564,143 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 34 reviews while Deep Instinct is ranked 30th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 6 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Deep Instinct is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Has a centralized console and does predictive analysis of malware". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Deep Instinct writes "A great threat-prevention solution that is light, simple to use, and easy to deploy and administer". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Deep Instinct is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike Falcon, Blackberry Protect and McAfee Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Deep Instinct 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.