We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"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."
"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."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"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."
"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."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"We've found the pricing to be reasonable."
"It has the feature to track an attack back. If there is an incident or an attack occurs, you can get a bird's eye view of that attack. You can see how the attackers came in and how they managed the attack. You can trace an attack. If you are giving a presentation to the management, you can easily show it to them in a live environment how the attackers came, which is amazing."
"Its detection rate is valuable. It is really an easy product to install and manage. It is quite effective at what it does, and if needed, it can also be co-managed, which means 24 hours and seven days a week monitoring through a SOC."
"Trend Micro XDR is stable, scalable, and reasonably priced."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"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."
"...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."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"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."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"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 reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"There isn't a lot I'd do to change it. The web interface could be improved to sort of make it a little easier to manage multiple clients out of one location. It could also be made a bit easier to sort of manage the licensing side of it."
"The product needs to have a lot more maturity, and they need to improve the overall technical support framework for getting the value out of XDR."
"It should integrate with more tools. There are a lot of tools that can do the PTP dump."
"The solution lacks compatibility with other products. It needs to integrate better with other surrounding solutions."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it."
"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."
"Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"It's quite expensive but we can customize it to reduce the price."
"It is costly. It is not that affordable for a small organization. Only big organizations can afford it. It is a new feature that has been added, so its price is fair. Its licensing is probably subscription-based. It is for one or two years."
"The price is reasonable. It's not exorbitant. CrowdStrike and other players are on the higher side."
"It would be nice if it was a little bit cheaper, but I think it has a fair price. It is comparable to others in the market."
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.
Fidelis Elevate integrates network visibility, data loss prevention, deception, and endpoint detection and response into one unified solution. Now your security team can focus on the most urgent threats and protect sensitive data rather than spending time validating and triaging thousands of alerts.
AI and expert security analytics
Powerful AI and expert security analytics correlate data from customer environments and Trend Micro’s global threat intelligence to deliver fewer, higher-fidelity alerts, leading to better, early detection.
Beyond the endpoint
Connecting email, endpoint, server, cloud workloads, and networks provides a broader perspective and a better context to identify threats more easily and contain them more effectively.
One console with one source of prioritized, optimized alerts supported with guided investigation simplifies the steps to achieving a full understanding of the attack path and impact on the organization.
Fidelis Elevate is ranked 6th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 2 reviews while Trend Micro XDR is ranked 5th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 4 reviews. Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro XDR is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "A scalable yet complex solution with some detection issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro XDR writes "Good detection rate, effective, rock-solid, and easy to install and manage". Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, ExtraHop Reveal(x), Attivo Networks, Vectra AI and Darktrace, whereas Trend Micro XDR is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Fortinet FortiEDR, SentinelOne and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response. See our Fidelis Elevate vs. Trend Micro XDR report.
We monitor all Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.