Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Norton 360

Cisco Secure Endpoint is well suited for keeping track of the many different and points that we have in our organization. All of these devices can easily be monitored with Cisco Secure Endpoint. It can monitor our servers and our desktops and laptops in our environment. It isn’t as appropriate for our student devices. However, those aren’t as critical since they are just Chromebooks.

Incentivized

For a stand-alone business this should do the trick, but if using across multiple clients (multi-tenancy not an option). Default settings within the program will cause performance issues if not tweaked, meaning someone with networking experience may be necessary. Not ideal for MSP's unless they only have a few clients, as the manageability must be done within "the walls" of each company.

• Threat identification: it finds things we wouldn't have even been looking for.
• Integration with Secure Malware Analytics for automatic submission of suspicious files.
• In-depth and complex configuration options for finely tuned policies for different users and endpoints.
• Part of the Cisco Secure Client product for easier distribution and reduction of running agents on end-user devices
• Integrates with Secure-X for single-pane of glass view of dashboards.

Incentivized

• Norton works quite quickly and is efficient enough to detect threats
• It is very easy and simple to install and is without any complications and irrelevant inquiries.
• Norton is available at a very reasonable price in the market and is not heavy on pocket.

• The update mechanism of the client is not obvious and takes some finesse to learn
• The clients auto update signatures, but not agents which I have seen lead to mixed version levels as it is harder to keep up with
• It is generally a challenge to manage the licenses and if you let the license lapse, it is a very bad thing in my opinion.

Incentivized

• It uses a lot of RAM which can cause issues in other areas of computer use.
• If you chose to un-install it can be difficult to get rid of all traces of the program.
• The initial configuring can be challenging for the average user as the manuals are overwhelming. Better tutorials would be helpful.

Incentivized

the renewal must be studied with different factors

Incentivized

I did renew it before because support is great and cost is great. I believe that Norton has a very long experience in what they do and they are doing a great job with all the updates they provide and the work they are doing. Moreover Norton is going in the right direction for sure.

AMP is very difficult to use compared to other products we've seen. It's hard to understand why there are so many different logins for the various products that supposedly integrate with AMP. We had weekly phone calls for months to implement the product yet none of the IT department really enjoys using this product or feels comfortable with the accuracy of detections. The number of false positives is high.

Incentivized

User interface is excellent. The green tickmark in the tray ensuring everything is undercontrol is so satisfying. I have turned on Auto updates so, I am not bothered about unnecessary download updates popup

Incentivized

no complain and no issue with availability

Incentivized

In terms of technical support for Cisco Secure Endpoint, the support has been pretty good. All the cases I submitted were solved in a reasonable time frame, and it was a good experience. However, I find that not as many vendors have the expertise I would expect.

Incentivized

Security software with very good features that works in the background.

Price suitable for companies of any size and easy to install and use.

Incentivized

no participation in implementation

Incentivized

Would like a manual or online version that is simple to understand and explains in detail what choices we have and why to make these choices.

Incentivized

Other products we use were, I think, well, nothing like Cisco Endpoint. There was Microsoft Defender. I think Sophos and CrowdStrike. I think the visibility and the security. We haven't had any issues with the system. Once it's been implemented, it works fine. The enhancements that come into play, we're benefiting from them. We're benefiting from the Telos threat intel, which is really good as well

Incentivized

User-friendly interface (it's not just AV and users who were interacting with the product), performance, resource usage (most of the computers were not very fresh and that factor was very critical), efficiency, it shouldn't be just sitting on a PC - it should protect it, what was perfectly done with that product.

Incentivized

• It ensures minimal spread of cyber threats in case of infiltration thanks to containment response capabilities.
• By keeping our endpoints threat-proof, our systems and devices run efficiently hence better productivity.
• It frees IT staff thanks to its automation and ability to keep threats away with minimal intervention.

Incentivized

• Poor performance against Spyware and other threats despite claiming to act against them (recognizes very few and eliminates less) It is limited to viruses.
• Regular blocking of incoming scripts (in front of other antivirus)
• Little or almost no compatibility with the Windows XP Firewall, but they are involved.