Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Webroot Endpoint Protection

Because of its integration with Windows, it is very easy to deploy and manage. Any IT department should be able to leverage the software and interface. The admin portal provides weighted recommendations that comprise the Secure Store, offering admins, security teams, and business owners valuable insights into their security footprint without requiring a strong security background. The software would be ideal for small and mid-sized businesses that cannot dedicate resources to security. Larger enterprises would also benefit, but may require the enhanced license.

Incentivized

The software tends to do a good job of basic protection but is not the best for larger clients and is not as powerful as some others offered on the market today. The support is not the best either, have had a hard time getting assistance in the past trying to resolve issues.

Incentivized

• One, it's crazy lightweight, so compared to some of the competitors that we also have used with our security services, it's really lightweight and so I don't have a lot of overhead on the system that it's running on.
• It does really fantastic PowerShell integration.

Incentivized

• Webroot Endpoint Protection works very well at blocking threats quickly and can undo changes if a file turns out to be harmful, which has helped us in the past.
• It runs quietly in the background without slowing down endpoints, even during scans, which is great.
• You can manage all your devices from one online dashboard, making it easy to set rules and see security alerts. One pane of glass is always great.

Incentivized

• So the fact that Defender for Endpoint still works with signatures is actually, I don't know, a little difficult for us because, I mean, since Microsoft trusts those signatures, you can easily inject code. And we've done it many times. To show that you can inject code through vulnerabilities like CV 2013, 99, and 33 but still keep the signature. So because of the trust of those signatures, the malware just kind of slides into the environment without Defender knowing. That's the first part. The second part is that the behavioral analysis is not precisely its Prime. It's not Defender's best capability for endpoints. So, Defender does not identify all behaviors considered by other EDRs in the market.

Incentivized

• It was missing detections. We found a better product that detects more malware.
• Deploying the endpoint agents was easy, but deploying Web Threat Shield was not and users could disable that functionality.
• When you deactivated old endpoints, they were put in an "inactive" category. You could not then delete the "inactive" endpoints. For someone who likes to keep things clean, this was annoying.
• I found the rollout of endpoint agent updates to be rather slow.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender is closely catching -up in market with existing competitors they have added DLP endpoint & DLP Network and Cloud DLP solution last year with OCR capabilities. I would say Microsoft Defender is not legacy Vendor in end point security, the need to learn from other vendors in market and focus on new XDR technologies, which is going to be new battle for all vendors

Incentivized

It has proven successful so far in our environment for controlling malware/virus outbreaks.

Incentivized

Because in terms of the usability is easy to understand, it's easy to manage, obviously you need to have specific skills to do that, but I would say that even the console and the product is walking through the flow that you are looking for on this console.

Incentivized

It does what it needs to do but we have noticed that malware is sort of uncommon and we have started to switch to other solutions of combating malware and suspicious activity such as using products like ThreatLocker and Field Effect, combined with things like malware bytes to perform scans when needed.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint chugs along just fine no matter what we throw at it and what systems it's running on. It doesn't take up a lot of resources either, so that's welcomed.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easy on memory and resources on clients.

Incentivized

Overall support is really good for this product. Since it's a Microsoft product, you will get good support from a number of different resources, including knowledgebase articles on the web, support from Microsoft technicians, and documentation (which tends to very thorough). Also, there is a vast user support community for this product, so user support forums would also be another valuable channel to get help if needed. I don't envision too many people will have issues/problems with the product, as it tends to run good overall.

Incentivized

Support has been reliable up to this point. A request can easily be generated via the console and support responding in a reasonable time. We have not had any major issues other than the basic agents not communicating with the console and the like.

Incentivized

Deployment was handled by our team here and everything went pretty smoothly. We did have a few hiccups in our test group, but that only took a bit to get ironed out.

Incentivized

I had some difficulties with remote users. I ended up needing to open a remote tech support session and finish the process. Other than a few speed bumps, I was impressed with the engineering of the install. Because of time differences, I was done installing in two days. The cost, per license, could be less.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers strong integration with Microsoft 365 and Azure services, which provide a unified security experience. While McAfee Trellix is known for solid antivirus, Microsoft Defender excels in integration in the ecosystem.

Incentivized

We would consider Webroot in the top 5 when you factor in ease of use, level of protection, and cost. Probably not as comprehensive as other end-point security solutions but the proper level of functionality and support for our needs. Question what impact the acquisition by OpenText is having on future development and support. OpenText also acquire Carbonite for back-up support.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easily scaled from small orgs to giant enterprises.

Incentivized

• Reduced incidents of security breaches lead to lower remediation costs and avoid potential financial losses and reputational damage.
• Reduces the need for additional third-party security solutions and training, thereby lowering overall security management costs.
• Increased efficiency and productivity of IT staff lead to better allocation of resources and cost savings.
• Reduces the risk of fines and sanctions associated with non-compliance, ensuring business continuity and protecting revenue.

Incentivized

• It saves us time and money in the fact that it runs and we never really have to worry about that part of IT. IT just runs
• Being able to centrally manage the clients is another plus because of being able to reach it virtually anywhere.
• Very simple quick installs. Gives us time to do other things.

Incentivized