Likelihood to Recommend 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.
Read full review It is well suited in environments that want a simple AV product/solution that, for the most part, can be easily deployed to client endpoints. It is also good for environments that want something that is easy to use by end-users, and also doesn't use a whole lot of system resources. It is less suited for environments that want an AV solution that is more robust feature-wise, or has more configurable options for the end-users. It is also less suited for those organizations that want an AV product to have the highest detection rate in the industry.
Read full review Pros 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. Read full review Microsoft System Center Endpoint Protection offers exceptional threat protections for signature-based "known" threats. The signatures are constantly updated and management of this application is super easy with the use of Microsoft SCCM. The application is very much a "set it and let it" type of deployment. Once you install it, there are very little configuration or changes that need to be made. Read full review Cons 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 The product could improve in the area of having better mechanisms in place with how the SCEP client is deployed/installed from the server on the management side. We have run into this firsthand with the client not installing on an endpoint, and then having to take the time to investigate why it was not installing. A second improvement that can be made is to keep trying to improve the products detection rate for finding malware/viruses. The case can be made that there are some products out there that do a better job at this and have a higher detection rate. Read full review Likelihood to Renew 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 The integration with a known solution is not good (Cisco ISE), product (10.x) does not automate remediation, however security is great and detects security threats with accuracy including heuristics, very few or no false positives
Read full review Reliability and Availability 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 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 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 There was a time and a place in which Microsoft System Center Endpoint Protection was an excellent choice to provide threat protections. However, now that threats have been evolving, so too does the need for more advanced protections. In its current offering, it just no longer meets the needs of our organization in terms of providing protections against threats.
Read full review Implementation Rating 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 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.
Read full review How SCEP stacks up against some of the other AV solutions/products is that it does a pretty good job overall (not the best in the industry) at detecting/removing malware, which is the main focus for a product like this. It is also easy to use on the end-user side, which can't be said for some other AV products on the market. I was not involved with the selection/purchase of the product in the organization, but I'm almost certain the organization selected this based on the tight integration with Microsoft System Center Manager, which is used in the organization. Also, given the fact that SCEP is tightly integrated and works well in organizations that utilize Microsoft products, it was probably another factor in selecting this. Lastly, the cost of licenses was probably lower (because of System Center already being in place) than other AV products.
Read full review Scalability 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 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 There was little/no cost associated with this software since we are utilizing SCCM and are paying license costs for that anyways. The level or protection is excellent for the cost of the software. There was at least one instance in which Microsoft System Center Endpoint Protection identified a crypto-malware, but not before it had already started to encrypt many of our files. So it did detect the threat, but since it was a little delayed we still were infected. Read full review ScreenShots