Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Secure Endpoint
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Secure Endpoint is a comprehensive, cloud-managed endpoint security solution designed to protect devices from advanced malware and cyber threats throughout the entire attack lifecycle—before, during, and after an attack. It offers powerful prevention capabilities to identify and stop threats before they compromise your systems, using multifaceted techniques including risk-based vulnerability management and posture assessments. The solution provides deep visibility and advanced detection…N/A
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
Kaspersky Small Office Security (formerly Kaspersky Work Space Security) is antivirus / endpoint security software from Russian company Kaspersky.
$29.99
per month
Pricing
Cisco Secure EndpointKaspersky Endpoint Security
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Essential Suite
$29.99
per month
Advanced Suite
$39.99
per month
Premium Suite
$44.99
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Secure EndpointKaspersky Endpoint Security
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Secure EndpointKaspersky Endpoint Security
Considered Both Products
Cisco Secure Endpoint
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Webroot Antivirus + Internet Security Complete (SecureAnywhere) and Veem
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Integration with the rest of the Cisco security stack made Cisco Secure Endpoint the right product.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Microsoft Defender XDR
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Because of the Cisco ecosystem
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Cisco Secure Endpoint is easier to deploy and use versus Trend Micro Deep Security. The interface is less intuitive (possibly subjective) when compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which required more training for support staff. Also the integration is not as good with Trend. …
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
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 …
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Cisco Secure Endpoint provides better overall support and detection compared to other products used. Strong visibility and a strong range of tools when researching an issue to find either information or resolution. Dashboards are also a lot cleaner than most products and easier …
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
I was not part of the selection process but know this was purchased on a suite of tools. We get so much more from MDE, CSE doesn’t compare.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Best tool if you have a heavy Cisco product suite for Intergrations. Send data to our SIEM (QRADAR) well and is easy to deploy with our SCCM. The groups and polices are helpful to customize protection for different endpoint needs.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Huntress is evaluating endpoints from a different perspective. SentinelOne would be an alternative product. Cisco Secure Endpoint always shows up reasonably close to SentinelOne in overall protection. SentinelOne does offer a SOC option which dramatically adds to the …
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
No participate of the selection
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Cisco Secure Endpoint provides much more protection, reporting, and features than Microsoft defender did for us.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Compared to most competitors, Cisco Secure Endpoint is affordable and offers better protection in features.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Cisco Secure Endpoint works in tandem with Cisco Umbrella, which allows to even further improve the overall security of the systems.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
We were using McAfee but the performance was not good and it consume a high memory. Cisco secure endpoint is very advanced and very lightweight for organizations. The configuration and management are very easy and centralized.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
The integration with all the other Cisco platforms made AMP a clear front-runner. Crowdstrike and Sophos had no integration at all and Palo Alto required their firewalls be deployed. Again, as a Cisco Security customer, it made complete sense to leverage their AMP technology.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Compared to Malwarebytes Enterprise, AMP is significantly harder to configure, update, implement, use. The overall burden that AMP puts on the IT department is rather high.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Cisco Secure Endpoint is an advanced EDR solution that is highly effective and scalable. Our experience previously with MalwareBytes and Microsoft Defender was not horrible, but these products were not as effective and did not integrate well with our other security products to …
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) for Endpoints is one of a wide spectrum of Cisco security products and is the first step that can bring you to start using Cisco AnyConnect and Cisco ISE to integrate with them.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Being all products of a similar nature, Cisco Advance Malware Protection stands out for its simplicity, low resource consumption, reporting, work dashboards and integration with the rest of the already installed suit.
Those are the most notable aspects, although the rest of the …
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
AMP is truly an advanced product offering much better protection and actionable information on your environment.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
AMP is far superior to Symantec in my opinion. It is much more robust and customizable. It is much easier to manage systems and to spot trouble areas. Deploying and upgrading clients is much simpler. It is a much more lightweight client on the desktop. Overall a much better …
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
Although is kinda expensive AMP has been our only choice because of the integration with other products like Umbrella.
Chose Cisco Secure Endpoint
When looking for a Malware Protection for Endpoints, AMP was our first and only choice. We like the fact that Cisco has a whole line of security software that can work together and so our goal has been to use the Cisco Suite that includes Umbrella, Firepower, AMP. We are very …
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Cisco is very complicated to use in my opinion and this leads to some operational doubts when you have to manage sensitive and critical operations. with Kaspersky there's more trust perception and a feeling that everything is going the right way and as expected. Cisco AMP can't …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Other cybersecurity products we've tested only detect a few malware.
They are not cost-effective as they have separate licenses for other features.
Other vendors no longer support the old version of the OS. This is very important to us as we still have legacy OS in place. To …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Offers equal or greater protection against current threats, stays updated. Its license is cheaper than the competition (i.e. EPDR) and financiers really like this.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Kaspersky Endpoint Security has less impact on computer memory and processing. On the other hand, I think the solution is much more advanced and more powerful overall. Both solutions have a central management console, but Kaspersky's solution has better usability and provides …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
In terms of management, it it much more difficult to cloud manage Kaspersky versus Webroot. Also, as stated before, much easier to make exceptions to virus definitions and scanning.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
one of the best antivirus software I have used with a much friendly interface and is easy to manage as compared to other security products.
As an admin, We have managed many security tasks in an organization. It does come in handy for such tasks without any hassle.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Kaspersky was chosen over other competitors for it's benefits. As Kaspersky is a fully fledge solution for encryption, patch management, OS deployment, Device control, web control, application whitelisting and endpoint protection.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
There are lots of reasons for choosing this endpoint security system. It is a very efficient tool in terms of identifying viruses. The biggest benefit is that it always keeps me away from opening harmful or suspicious sites. This is the most affordable security product.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
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 …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Fairly similar, but Kaspersky is more Cloud centric, I would say better for Remote workers. Price is better with yearly subscriptions.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Kaspersky Endpoint Security was chosen because it has very high reliability and an easy to use graphical interface. It also has excellent technical support, and in evaluations, it met all the technical requirements that the management needed. The software protects against the …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
At the time, we thought its centralized management and highly-rated anti-virus detection capabilities stood out above the other solutions we reviewed.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
The Central Security Center for the Symantec Endpoint Protection product that was previously being used was horrible and the client programs were a huge drain on system resources. The workstation resources were overloaded when this program was running and rendered the …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Kaspersky is a leader in endpoint protection, but its ties to potential adversaries are unsettling. Kaspersky has a great threat research team and quickly identifies malicious software and its signature. Its web-based protection is also top notch. This is a great product but as …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
It is one of the best anti-virus products that I have used. Much more friendly user interface. It is way easier to implement and install. It is also way easier to manage through the MMC. The console is Microsoft like and very intuitive to any system admin who has run consoles …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Kaspersky adds another layered approach to defense that continues to protect and provide ongoing operations. The suite of products within the solution continue to provide solid proactive threat detection and prevention actions, centralized enterprise controls make management …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
I have not used a competitor of Kaspersky's.
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
System Center is more robust than Kaspersky Security Center. They both offer a single pane of glass for remote management of Endpoints (at the Advanced level for Kaspersky). Kaspersky does an excellent job of providing 3rd party applications in packages that can be downloaded …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
I tried both Avast and Avira and the annoying pop ups to upgrade and being locked behind a paywall made buying Kaspersky a no brainer, especially when I have seen it first hand protect our data. The interface for all 3 was lacking in some sort of way but the Kaspersky UI was …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
I used Norton for almost 10 years, always reliable and never had a big problem with the features or offerings. Kaspersky won me over with its speed, mobility and much more reliable nature. Norton had a nasty habit of uninstalling programs it didn't want, even though they were …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Kaspersky Endpoint Security often comes up on top of other competitor products for a variety of reasons. These include overall speed, easy to user interface, lower costs for implementation, and easy to manage features. It has a great security research department to deal with …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
We looked at other solutions and chose Kaspersky over the other software out there as the price point on a multiyear contract was aggressive and the software running on the computers as the agent was thin and didn't use up much system resources. We also like that Kasperksy has …
Chose Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Kaspersky Work Space Security is little bit [better] than Microsoft Forefont. Better software.
Features
Cisco Secure EndpointKaspersky Endpoint Security
Endpoint Security
Comparison of Endpoint Security features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Secure Endpoint
7.2
Ratings
17% below category average
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
8.3
Ratings
3% below category average
Anti-Exploit Technology6.70 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)8.50 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Centralized Management4.50 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Hybrid Deployment Support8.50 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Infection Remediation7.30 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Vulnerability Management6.80 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Malware Detection8.60 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Secure EndpointKaspersky Endpoint Security
Small Businesses
ThreatLocker
ThreatLocker
Score 9.5 out of 10
ThreatLocker
ThreatLocker
Score 9.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
BlackBerry Protect (CylancePROTECT)
BlackBerry Protect (CylancePROTECT)
Score 9.1 out of 10
BlackBerry Protect (CylancePROTECT)
BlackBerry Protect (CylancePROTECT)
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management
Score 9.8 out of 10
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management
Score 9.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Secure EndpointKaspersky Endpoint Security
Likelihood to Recommend
8.7
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
4.5
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.3
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Availability
7.3
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.6
(0 ratings)
8.5
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
4.5
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Secure EndpointKaspersky Endpoint Security
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Pros
  • 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.
Read full review
  • Potential threat identification and quarantining is immediate and very reliable.
  • Monitoring system updates, statistics, hardware status, and connectivity issues for all systems on the network.
  • Installation and registration, either remotely or in person, is a breeze, usually taking about 10-15 minutes, and with step by step confirmations.
  • The organizational hierarchy, as well as the abilities listed in the hierarchy are extremely user friendly and easy to use for novices and pros alike.
Read full review
Cons
  • 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.
Read full review
  • The PC imaging tools are difficult to set up and use
  • Device Encryption tools are getting better, but are difficult to manage.
  • The policies are powerful, but could be broken up. More help can be provided in what the policy element does within the policy setup
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
the renewal must be studied with different factors
Read full review
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
Read full review
Usability
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.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
no complain and no issue with availability
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Support Rating
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.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
no participation in implementation
Read full review
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
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • 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.
Read full review
  • It reduced the incidents of infections and so reduced the efforts needed by the IT department to mitigate problems.
  • It made it difficult to manage the security of our growing mobile user base due to infrequent contact with our on-premise management server.
Read full review
ScreenShots