It can be used if you are already familiar with other Microsoft System Center tools, it will provide integration and it will be easy to use from an Administrator's perspective. However, if you want more detailed information related to the troubleshooting, specific fields, or data, it will not be that granular.
Anytime you are managing multiple servers and workstations on a network, having a good Security Center to assist with that management is critical. Kaspersky Security Center provides that and gives the administrator the tools and reports necessary to properly manage and monitor these systems across a network. This is a VERY useful tool and it makes my job much easier.
It is fairly easy to use, from both a technician and users point of view. The install itself is pretty simple, and setup of the software is also fairly simple. For users, it is easy to use the software to encrypt the computer.
It doesn't seem to use a whole lot of system resources when the encryption is enabled on the computer. You shouldn't experience any slowness of the computer, other than the time it takes to first encrypt the computer.
It serves its main purpose very well, and that is to protect computers from intrusions/data breaches. It is particularly good for protecting computers that are accessing/storing sensitive/confidential data.
Even if it's the best we tested, I think write performance could be improved. Maybe with dedicated hardware inside the TPM?
No integration with OS password is a shame as most others have it and it is Microsoft on Microsoft so they can probably do it better then anyone else and safer.
I wish they would support multiple passwords like FileVault on macOS. If it's a shared computer, you have to give the only password to Bitlocker to both users.
The product is stable and accurate in detecting security threats. There are very few or no false positives in detecting security threats or unusual behavior and has very sharp heuristics. The product does the job very well including saving us money in getting 3rd party patch management tools as the business is already using Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager which is Microsoft product specific and the product patches these third party products e.g Adobe Flash Player
I will give Kaspersky a score of 9 out of 10 for scalability, as it allows businesses to easily expand their security infrastructure. This means it won't cost them a lot to add further protection and security. It won't also require them to purchase other hardware and services for their required protection.
I've used the on-premise server. I've only experienced one time that we couldn't open the console, and that was a server issue. It seems to be a dependable solution. It's there, and it's stable.
Users don't notice any slowdown with the antivirus running on their systems. There have been issues when the systems have missed a scheduled scan, and it was checked to run at [a] first available time, they will start a full scan at startup. This has caused some lag. Normally there are also some issues with the workstation, but it is something to note.
Not good nor bad, BitLocker encryption is a symptom of our era, we need to protect ourselves and our data, BitLocker is a tool, as an IT we have to deal with it but it doesn't bring any benefit to my daily operations.
I give the maximum grade because we have no complaints; we never had any failure, serious error, and serious threat to the company. All of its features work very well. The great advantage of having a product supported by an industry-leading security company is that regularly updated security protocols will protect the system against all emerging threats.
Make sure to provide awareness campaigns on changes that will be implemented and WHY the business is doing it and the benefits reaped. Benefits reaped is very important for the justification of why things have to change and emphasizing the importance of security. This will reduce user disgruntlement and total bitterness on use of their workstation or laptop
This was formerly called Symantec PGP encryption. We selected BitLocker since this is what the University has deployed and is currently supporting. BitLocker has many advantages over Symantec PGP, as BitLocker is built-into all Windows computers. With PGP, this was a commercial product that had to be installed on each machine. That product also was not as easy or intuitive to use as BitLocker, and there were also more issues/problems that occasionally occurred with PGP.
I've used the cloud version of CarbonBlack and Bitdefender. They both say they automatically scan files as soon as they appear on your computer. The user/administrator is left to trust that the technology works. With Bitdefender, it at least allows an on-demand scan, but it still never reports to the user if the file was clean. Kaspersky automatically scans and notifies the user that it has been scanned AND the results of the scan. In IT we know we can't always trust the technology to perform as designed. I NEED confirmation to feel at ease. Kaspersky makes it easy to run an on-demand scan of a workstation if there is suspicion of an infection. Another thing is that I have not [seen] in Bitdefender, and I know CarbonBlack does not provide inventory information for the administrators like Kasperky. Kaspersky gives detailed information about the systems it scan and lists every software installed. You can even filter and search for specific installations in your network through the Kaspersky Server Center (KSC). It helps know what licenses are used and where.
You can create groups and create different policies for each group. You can customize many parts of the software before it is deployed. You can create different tasks and schedules based on the groups. It is customizable.
Protects against data loss and theft, which can be very expensive if PII, SPI, PHI is involved. Fines for this type of loss can be very high, along with the costs of notification, and discovery.
Cost is included in Windows O/S, without needing additional licensing costs.
