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 …
It is well suited especially for users that access or store sensitive/confidential data on their computers. In the case of where users are accessing confidential data over the network, it is highly recommended to use Bitlocker to encrypt the computer. In the case where users are storing confidential data on their computer, it should be a requirement that BitLocker is used/enabled. It would be less appropriate if someone was using a computer and they were not dealing with any sensitive data, or in cases where the computer is used for recreational purposes (browsing the web, playing games, etc).
I think Kaspersky is well suited for large and small companies. Larger companies can take advantage of the KSC (Kaspersky Security Center) servers to help manage a large network. The KSC has many good features to help monitor the health of the organization. It does a good job with updating and deploying remotely. It has inventory features, and can even deploy non-Kaspersky software packages uploaded to the center. KSC can become a source of good information about [your] network that can be seen at a glance. IT departments are normally smaller than they need to be. KSC helps with larger and smaller companies because of this. A small company would appreciate the amount of information and management that can be done through KSC without needing extra help. If the company is small enough that they don't have servers on-site, there is a cloud version. I have not used that to know how it differs from the local KSC.
The Security Center is laid out very well and makes it easy to install and manage the client endpoint protection on servers and workstations.
The way security policies are defined and managed is very easy to understand.
The client programs seem to be lighter and smaller on the client systems than others I have used in the past. Using fewer resources is always an advantage.
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
BitLocker Drive Encryption solution offering is cheaper than the one that McAfee offers, it will help you with specific business concerns like "how many encrypted assets do I have?" it's easy to maintain, easy to deploy, and easy to track. It's best suited for companies that are not trying to go far away on the disk encryption matter
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 with everything has its place.
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.
The biggest positive impact it has on ROI is the cost savings, since there is no cost to using the software.
Since it's widely available to anyone with a Windows computer, and the program is built into the operating system, there is no need to really install anything. This helps to save time of the IT department having to do installs, and also keep track of licensing, etc.
