Jamf Protect vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

The main reason we went with Jamf Protect was because we wanted a dedicated macOS security endpoint. Is was easy to implement and migrate over from our previous endpoint provider. As a university we have lab macOS devices that multiple users use. So we have Jamf Protect profiles that block the use of external drives and other other profiles that allow it. We different user accounts requiring different access this can get a bit messy when deploying the config profiles at login for each user that signs in.

Incentivized

Usually we had lots two platforms tasked with scanning exposures, anti-malware and provision for information and threat management. But with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint we have an all inclusive platform that even integrate with other Microsoft security apps such as Microsoft Defender for Cloud for enhanced threat insights and visibility.

Incentivized

• Low resource use Protected Agent - stops tampering with agent and is not a resource hog
• Managed and custom Analytics - along with the out of the box Analytics provided by JAMF, admins can also set up their own to focus on areas of concern eg NISTcompliance items
• Vendor support - support is very responsive and knowledgeable

Incentivized

• It provides a unified security experience when combined with other Microsoft products such as Microsoft Defender for 365 and Azure Defender.
• It has an excellent dashboard and centralized view that make it easy to see and control everything from one location.
• It's an EDR tool designed to help you understand incidents and alerts better.
• Real-time detection of attacks and prompt endpoint device responses. It effortlessly interacts with additional Microsoft security products.

Incentivized

• The integration with Jamf Pro has come a long way but could still be a bit more "one stop" vs two tools and two dashboards.

Incentivized

• Does not allow for remediation from the management console.
• The ticket system doesn't alert the person assigned to the ticket.
• You have to submit requests for whitelisting applications.
• Scanning exclusions are tricky to find.
• Adding devices, especially Apple devices, is very cumbersome.

Incentivized

The first time I tried to onboard my macOS endpoints to MDE I struggled for quite a bit. I had to reach out to Microsoft's MDE support team. The tech was very helpful in walking me through the steps during a screen share session

Incentivized

In some aspects, Jamf Protect was far superior to the others mentioned above. The only downside I can see is that it is only macOS which could be a problem for hybrid environments.

Incentivized

in an overall protection sentinelone is providing better protection for us, but as it comes with subscription's limitation, we have to be really careful in managing the licenses, the MS Defender for endpoint is providing us a decent protection which we are not complaining about, why we chose them ? as mentioned, this is coming with our subscription

Incentivized

• Better detection of malware reducing downtime and risk to network
• Easy to implement
• Can be a bit of a steep learning curve in general

Incentivized

• By providing robust threat protection, Defender for Endpoint can prevent downtime caused by security issues. Employees can work without interruptions, leading to increased productivity.
• By significantly decreasing the frequency of security incidents like malware infections and data breaches, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can protect your network. The cost of incident response, cleanup, and potential regulatory fines are reduced as a result of the decrease in events.
• The implementation and configuration of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint may require an initial investment in licensing, training, and deployment, which can temporarily affect ROI.
• The cost of licensing can be substantial, especially for larger organizations. This cost needs to be factored into the ROI calculation.

Incentivized