Kaspersky Endpoint Security vs. Windows Server

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.

Incentivized

Anytime I need a server for something, whether to test a new platform or app, devote a server to hosting something, etc., Windows Server is my go-to choice. Recently I needed a new server to host a web server and web application, so I spun up a Windows Server 2025 VM and was up and running in no time at all.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• Backup of workstations & itself - reliably, consistently, with Bare-Metal Restore and deduplication
• File management and Security on a per file/folder/user basis is simple and fully done through an easy GUI
• DNS, DHCP server functions are easy to configure using the built-in GUI

Incentivized

• 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

Incentivized

• Microsoft needs to minimize the update frequency by making the product more secure. It can become very exhausting trying to keep updated if you don't have a dedicated support team. It can become challenging where the business is unable to allow downtime for reboots as part of the update process.
• Prone to security and audit vulnerabilities.
• The operating system needs more CPU and memory resources compared to other options such as Linux.
• Understanding the licensing model can be abit confusing.
• Comes with a standard firewall, but not the most secured one available. Would suggest using a more secured firewall as part of your antivirus software.
• Due to the number of vulnerabilities and the operating system being a target for hackers, anti-virus software is a must.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

I've carefully reviewed the servers and services currently running on Windows Server 2012, and given the opportunity would renew them as is going forward. There are two systems I currently have in place, one is a very large Linux implementation for a large ecommerce site, and one is a very large backup solution front ended by FTP servers running Linux. Neither are well suited for Windows, but the overall network infrastructure is and will be Windows Server for the foreseeable future.

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.

There are simply too many different parts of Windows Server to make it a cohesive piece of software. While some of the newer features found in Windows Server 2012 and 2016 have nice UIs that are logically laid out, there are enough parts of the system that is still based on old code with clunky UIs and confusing options to make Windows Server a particularly user-friendly experience.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

some times server hungs and user sessions were busy to connect

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.

Incentivized

need to improve the performance more

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.

Incentivized

Microsoft's support is hugely wide-ranging from articles online to having to contact them directly for the more serious issues. In recent years when I have contacted them directly, I have found the support o be excellent as I have found myself connected to very knowledgeable people in the field in which I needed the support. The online support available is vast and I tend to find most of the time that there is always someone out there who has had the same issue as me in the past and knows something about how to resolve it! This is the advantage of using industry standard and long-established systems such as Windows Server.

Incentivized

it was my senior who trained Windows Server features and i was satisfied

it was recorded session and useful

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

Incentivized

Make sure that you have detailed processes in place for every server instance you plan to install/upgrade, if possible get the base OS loaded and Windows Updates applied ahead of time, and if using a VM take a snapshot prior to installing each role, as well as along the way.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

I find Microsoft Windows Server is a much easier OS to deploy and administer. It does require more resources to run, requires more security updates and overall has a larger footprint. Rebooting the Windows Server takes a much longer time than RHEL for example. An administration task such as expanding a drive in Windows can be very simple, however in RHEL it is not.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

yes i completely agree multi deployment

• 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.

Incentivized

• Support for a wide range of applications (compatibility) This is especially valuable.
• The cost of licensing is significantly higher than that of many competing solutions, which means the justification has to be more complete.
• The initial environment setup with full organization management provides a complete solution set to get started.
• Patching/Frequent updates disruptive nature must be accepted.

Incentivized