Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Reviews

The solution is primarily used for securing endpoints, mainly desktops and laptops.

We're taking the adoption in phases. We started with endpoints and we want to expand into other capabilities at the application level.

We've mainly used it for endpoints. However, we've also used it for DLP as well. We're also in the process of implementing it for cloud and identity as well. However, it's very good for endpoints, and that's our main focus. 

The malware protection is good.

The visibility it provides is very useful. We can combine visibility with wider security features and alerts around malware, misconfiguration, or any other kinds of threats. The cloud portal is quite good. From there, we are able to see alerts and have colleagues review issues and monitor to see if any patterns arise. It's serving us quite well overall. It allows us to look at other items, like application and browser control. 

It helps us prioritize threats. We have a process in place now where we can review issues and remediate them effectively.

We have been able to integrate a variety of Microsoft security products together. We use Azure AD, for example, and we've begun to implement DLP, among other items. We're looking at labeling and tagging and will expand into that soon. 

Defender has more stringent system requirements than, for example, Check Point. So when we implemented the Check Point Endpoint agent, that solution didn't mind what version of Windows you were using. When we moved to Defender, Defender had certain system prerequisites that had to be met. So we had to make sure that we're on a minimum version of Windows when we're utilizing Office, and Office has to be a particular version as well. It has more stringent system requirements that have to be met before you can implement it.

It works natively together with other Microsoft solutions. Once you get more and more of those different components across the environment, then you start to get better visibility. So, rather than having lots of different solutions, you have fewer solutions and a single vendor solution. That way, you start getting into a position where you get better visibility and integration as well.

The standardization is good. It's important. It's helping me with monitoring and learning.

Updates and upgrades are quite smooth and seamless. 

Defender helps us automate routine tasks. Quite a lot of Microsoft is straightforward for us now. Previously, we didn't have enough resources and were unable to look at the alerts. Having this in place makes things a lot more straightforward for us. We have both the technology and the people in place now, alongside the process. We do see the benefits in that, and that's why we're continuing our adoption across the estate in terms of client and server as well. 

It's helping us avoid looking at multiple dashboards and centralized monitoring. We're not fully there yet. We're getting there.

While we haven't witnessed time saving yet, once it's fully deployed, it will. By then, we'll have standardized processes across a single solution. We have saved money, however, as we continue to reduce non-Mircosft systems. Since we won't be using various competing technologies, we can save on licensing costs. We've likely so far saved 15%.

While it's hard to estimate exactly how much, the solution has helped us decrease time to detection and time to respond. 

We'd like to see integrations with more vulnerability scanning solutions like Tenable. It would be good to be able to compare both systems to threats that are arising. 

I've used the solution for the past couple of years. I haven't used it, however, on an active basis. It's not a solution that requires active engagement. 

The solution is stable. We've had no issues. 

We've had no issues with scaling. We're scaling up to just under 2,500 systems.

We haven't had much cause for raising tickets; however, largely support is very good. We did receive initial support during deployment and have a unified support agreement. It's simple and straightforward when we do need help. 

We have used a Check Point solution as well in the past. We're moving away from other competing technologies. We had a number of issues with Check Point in terms of the mix of client devices and operating it in a VDI environment. It wasn't as reliable as we would have liked. It might have also been a resourcing issue - not just a Check Point issue.

In terms of the actual implementation, once everything is in place, it's quite smooth, and you see the benefits quite quickly as well.

I was not directly involved in the deployment of Defender. I was more involved in procurement. 

Defender is part of the plan we signed up for. Overall, it's part of a wider suite and is representing well, although it's hard to gauge how much of our overall licensing price is based on Defender as a product. It's part of a wider investment in Microsft 365. 

We have been through a merger in the last five years, so there were multiple solutions we were using, such as Trend Micro and Kaspersky, as well as Cisco, that we considered before deciding to standardize under Microsoft. 

We are starting to also use Microsoft Defender for Cloud. We have a small POC that we are getting off the ground. We have not yet explored bidirectional sync capabilities.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I would advise new users to just be mindful of system requirements. You do need to have a relatively up-to-date Windows estate. Take into account legacy considerations in terms of displacing other non-Mircosoft solutions.

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

We utilize Microsoft Defender for Endpoint as our EDR solution, which stands for endpoint detection and response. Through this solution, devices are integrated. If new vulnerabilities or novel attacks emerge, Defender for Endpoint promptly identifies them. It serves as our primary EDR solution amidst the variety available in the market.

The current surge in Defender for Endpoint's popularity is attributed to its real-time detection capabilities. Additionally, we can execute SOAR actions, namely security orchestration response. For instance, if we need to isolate a device from the network or run an antivirus scan on a machine, Defender for Endpoint facilitates these tasks.

Consider a scenario where one of the devices becomes compromised. During the investigation, if a malicious IP address is identified, it can be blocked using Defender for Endpoint.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers excellent visibility. We can observe all the details regarding the attack process, such as the type of activity that occurred, including the entire MITRE ATT&CK framework. This enables us to view the initial actions, the device involved, the IP address used, and the extent of the impact on users and devices all through a single interface.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint definitely assists us in prioritizing threats throughout our enterprise. Based on the signatures, the alert categories are related to high severity, medium severity, and low severity. Therefore, we can determine which alerts require our focus and prioritize them accordingly.

I am currently the Subject Matter Expert for Microsoft within my organization. This encompasses the entire Microsoft security suite. I specialized in working with Microsoft Sentinel. In the past, I was a part of the Microsoft Sentinel team itself, back in 2017 when Sentinel was in its pilot version, known as Azure Security Insights. 

It's very easy to integrate the Microsoft solutions. We have data connectors and APIs readily available. There are no difficulties. If we teach an unfamiliar person for a week how to use Defender for Endpoint and Microsoft Sentinel, they can likely gain insight into the basics of integrating Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Sentinel, Defender for Identity, or Defender for Cloud Apps.

These solutions work natively together to deliver coordinated detection responses across our environment. When an incident is detected in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, the same incident will be captured in Microsoft Sentinel within a few minutes. The integration capabilities with both Microsoft and third-party solutions are valuable.

The comprehensiveness of threat protection provided by these Microsoft security solutions is combined into a single interface. We can access all necessary features from one place. The combined solutions offer us User and Entity Behavior Analytics, Endpoint Detection and Response, on-premises, and cloud application security. While no single product can handle everything independently, by implementing basic security practices across all Microsoft products, we achieve a comprehensive threat detection system.

The bi-directional sync capability is a feature that allows us to enable safe devices in both Defender for Cloud and Defender for Endpoint.

Sentinel allows us to ingest data from across our entire ecosystem. If we are utilizing third-party firewalls or other products, we can employ APIs to integrate those solutions with Sentinel.

Sentinel allows us to examine threats and respond comprehensively from a single location. Within this location, we can utilize SOAR playbooks to accomplish different tasks, such as blocking all compromised email sign-in sessions with just one click.

Sentinel is a comprehensive security product, owing to its integrated SOAR, UEBA, and threat intelligence capabilities. UEBA employs built-in machine learning to identify users with high, medium, and low-risk profiles. The user interface also includes a feature that enables us to log out of the user. Threat intelligence has the ability to assimilate all access information from third-party solutions and identify threats originating from the internet. Sentinel consistently operates proactively to prevent compromises. 

I used to utilize Splunk back in 2015, but I have recently transitioned into being a Microsoft security advocate due to the cost optimization benefits. Microsoft Sentinel's pricing is based on the data we ingest. We have the flexibility to choose different models, such as the pay-as-you-go model or the bandwidth model. For instance, if we ingest 500 GB of EPS, we will incur charges for that usage; however, a 20 percent discount is applicable in this scenario. The pricing is directly linked to the amount of data we ingest, which is advantageous. I prefer not to ingest certain security events that are intended for operational purposes. By excluding these events, I can effectively reduce the overall cost of using Microsoft Sentinel. Additionally, being a cloud-native tool eliminates the need for any physical hardware. With just one click, the entire installation process is completed.

There are three ways Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has benefited our organization. The primary advantage is the optimization of our organization's scanning process. We have established a bi-weekly scanning process that runs at midnight, encompassing all machines. This stands as the foremost enhancement. The second advantage revolves around obtaining visibility into vulnerabilities within our environment. Considering our role as an MSSP, responsible for managing over 25 clients, this visibility holds paramount importance. Within Defender, a particularly noteworthy feature is the enabled management. This provides us with the latest information regarding vulnerabilities within Microsoft products as well as third-party software. The third and final advantage pertains to responding to emerging threats. For instance, in the case of a new attack, such as the recent CVE 3688, which targets a Microsoft Office vulnerability, including a zero-day exploit lacking an available solution, our Microsoft-oriented threat intelligence block comes into play. Through custom query languages deployed within Defender, we have the capability to identify anomalous activities. Additionally, this third point ties in with the Application Guard rules. These rules have proven instrumental in proactively preventing ransomware attacks. They operate by automatically obstructing any suspicious processes occurring within the Office environment.

Defender for Endpoint assists in automating routine tasks and identifying high-value alerts. We have APIs established, allowing us to develop our own dashboards using the Defender for Endpoint APIs. For instance, we can utilize Power BI to generate a security report, providing a comprehensive overview of the organization's internal activities.

It has eliminated the necessity for multiple dashboards. This pertains to the MXDR dashboard, which stands for Microsoft Extended Detection Dashboard, as well as the Detection Response Dashboard. Essentially, we have consolidated these into a single comprehensive dashboard, developed entirely by Microsoft. This unified dashboard streamlines the process of accessing organizational insights. As a result, there's no longer a need to access different security products to view their respective dashboards. Within Defender for Endpoint itself, we offer an array of security reports, all conveniently accessible with just one click. For those who may not find the reports relevant, we also provide the option to utilize our in-house developers for Power BI integration. This entails having a centralized dashboard where data from all products is collected and displayed in one location, facilitating a holistic view of security reports.

The integration into a single dashboard has simplified our security operations. Previously, our team had to perform numerous manual tasks for all customers. Therefore, with automation, when we present the report to the customers, they are quite impressed with having everything in one place. 

Microsoft Defender for Endpoints' threat intelligence assists us in preparing for potential threats before they materialize, enabling us to take proactive measures. We identify these proactive threats due to the presence of a threat entry system. If any IOCs are obtained, they are undoubtedly identified by Microsoft Sentinel. Moreover, we have set up indicators ingestion for Defender for Endpoint. This process involves creating steps to acquire data from third-party sources and directly inputting it into Defender for Endpoint. Since Defender for Endpoint has a capacity limit of 15,000 indicators of compromise, we can only ingest data up to this extent. Any surplus data will be automatically removed, provided their IOC scores fall below 60 within a month. Consequently, new IOCs will replace the removed ones.

It has saved our organization around 30 percent of our time in terms of not having to worry about malware. When any malware does get in, it is automatically remediated. Now, the main portion of our time is dedicated to conducting in-depth investigations and identifying other occurrences.

We have cut our organization's costs in half compared to our previous solutions. This is mainly due to the automation of most tasks, which means we now only need ten people to manage 20 customers, a significant reduction from the 30 engineers we needed before.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has significantly reduced our time for detection and response. Our Service Level Agreement entails detecting issues within 15 minutes and responding within 30 minutes. Defender for Endpoint has greatly contributed to these time savings. The incidents that we used to address using Splunk required extensive coordination within our team and with our customers, leading to substantial time consumption. Previously, resolving a single incident took around 40 minutes. Presently, this process takes approximately 15 minutes.

The most valuable feature is the timeline, which allows us to view the details of an event 30 minutes before and after.

Forensic investigation is a valuable feature of Defender for Endpoint.

We can run the virus scan across our entire environment.

We can block suspicious URLs and quarantine malicious files within the Defender for Endpoint portal.

Some of the integrations that Defender should include involve the use of the web app. Utilizing the web app implies that the Defender API should be accessible through mobile devices as well. For instance, if there exists a mobile application, it would be beneficial. Let's imagine a scenario where I'm traveling and I receive a new alert. With a Defender mobile application, I could easily isolate the threat, conduct an investigation on my mobile device, or even automatically escalate or assign the alert to my engineers.

There are certain third-party apps that haven't been integrated with Defender. I would be delighted to witness the integration of those apps with Defender for Endpoint. 

The deployment of Defender for Endpoint should be made smoother via Intune.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for five years.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is stable.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

The technical support is fine but it takes time to reach them.

Neutral

We previously used Splunk but switched to Microsoft Defender for Endpoint because of the cost and smoother operation.

With the proper training, the initial setup is straightforward.

When conducting customer onboarding, the deployment will require a minimum of three days. Therefore, we must ensure everything is executed flawlessly and follow security best practices. Emphasizing precise deployment is crucial. Hence, deploying without careful planning is not an option, aiming to prevent any issues in a larger environment. In contrast, a smaller environment can be deployed within two days.

For a large organization with over 5,000 employees, a team of up to six people is required for the deployment.

We are achieving a 15 percent return on investment, which is contributing to the growth and impact of our company.

If we are acquiring everything in a single place, the front end becomes cost-effective. We won't need to purchase five separate products for various tasks. Instead, it's one product designed for five tasks, which is certainly a cost-effective approach.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint an eight out of ten.

We also utilize Defender for Cloud. Defender for Cloud is employed specifically for the Azure product. If we have servers deployed within Azure, the system handles alerting, traceability, and security. Therefore, we certainly use it.

We have three locations where Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is deployed. One is in Australia, another is in Qatar, and the third is in India. Consequently, we employ approximately two hundred personnel.

No maintenance is required for Defender for Endpoint on the customer's end.

A single-vendor security solution approach is better than a best-of-breed strategy. We all are using Microsoft laptops and OS.

I recommend completing a POC before adapting Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

Our primary use case for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is desktop security.

Defender for Endpoint has improved our security posture by ensuring that malicious websites aren't accessed, thereby enhancing desktop and network security.

The visibility into our attack surface provided by Defender for Endpoint is good.

Defender for Endpoint has significantly reduced our SOC team's workload by automating threat detection and response, allowing them to focus on other critical projects. This increased efficiency has minimized security concerns and freed up several hours per week for the team.

We are primarily a Microsoft environment, but we also utilize a few Macs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint functions effectively across both platforms.

Web filtering is the most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint because it effectively maintains security for website access.

There is a need for improvement in reducing false positives. Defender flags vulnerabilities based on registry keys or temporary files that are not necessarily vulnerabilities. This creates a lot of false positives. There could also be better clarity in navigating through the GUI to identify and resolve vulnerabilities.

A disconnect exists between the subject-matter experts and Microsoft's Level One support teams, causing delays in issue resolution. Repeated interactions are necessary due to Level One's lack of tools and knowledge, hindering efficient problem-solving and negatively impacting our experience with Microsoft support.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for about three years.

Defender for Endpoint is a stable product with reliable uptime.

The support from Microsoft is somewhat lacking. The level-one support seems disconnected from subject matter experts, leading to back-and-forth delays in resolving issues.

Neutral

CrowdStrike's GUI is more user-friendly and provides easy-to-follow instructions, while Defender for Endpoint requires more effort to access detailed file information and vulnerability assessments. For instance, locating a specific device involves navigating through reported vulnerabilities, clicking on associated devices, and then searching for the device name to identify the vulnerabilities and their origins. The switch to Defender for Endpoint was likely motivated by cost savings and compliance requirements.

Defender for Endpoint is a good security product that provides a good return on investment.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a seven out of ten. It has effectively improved our security posture, but there are areas where support and usability can be enhanced.

On-premises

Currently, I'm working to build out DLP policies in Defender for Endpoints.

Defender for Endpoint enables us to see vulnerabilities on certain endpoints and investigate the attack surface. We've improved our Security Score to the industry standard. The solution has reduced the mean time to remediation, but it's hard to give a precise number because it varies on a case-to-case basis. Automatic remediation of certain vulnerabilities has allowed our SOC to work on other projects. 

Attack surface reduction and limiting attack surface vectors are valuable features. It's helpful to isolate specific devices and get super granular with the features they offer. The visibility into the attack surface is good. It gets highly granular. I don't work on that side, but the people who do tell me they get more visibility. 

Defender for Endpoint is complex, and the documentation is detailed. At the same time, it's hard to navigate sometimes. You have to go through tons of documentation to find what you want.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for one and a half years.

The stability is great. I haven't seen any outages with Microsoft.

It's pretty easy to scale with Microsoft, as they make it easy if you look into the documentation.

I rate Microsoft support eight out of 10. Customer service has been pretty good. I don't have any complaints.

Positive

We've had E5 licensing for a while now, but our security stacks were spread across multiple resources, so we are currently consolidating.

I don't work much with the costs, but I have not heard of any issues with pricing, licensing, or setup costs for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint eight out of 10.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure

I use Defender for Endpoint every day, for example, when a user downloads an unwanted application, we get an alert. Sometimes we have suspicious processes in an endpoint, and we receive an alert for those activities.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint helps in detecting different alerts and potential threats by providing alerts and timelines with detailed explanations, which is useful to understand and close or address the issues.

In Microsoft Defender, there is a security portal that allows advanced hunting. You can query and access useful information from logs and events, which is powerful and efficient. Additionally, the timeline feature helps in understanding which process launched what and identifying errors.

Sometimes, there are difficulties in downloading a file considered as malicious. We encounter a bug that requires several attempts to download, which is a bit of a challenge.

I have been working with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint since February, which is approximately eight months.

The stability of the solution is rated an eight out of ten. It is quite stable.

The scalability of the solution is rated as eight, suggesting it is reasonably scalable.

I contacted Microsoft support for personal use of Defender, and they were very nice, providing solutions quickly. This was a positive experience.

Positive

Before using Defender for Endpoint, I used SentinelOne. Defender is easier to use than SentinelOne.

For the initial setup, I’d give it an eight out of ten, suggesting it’s quite straightforward.

The price for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is about three euros, which is considered reasonably priced. I'd rate it seven out of ten for cost.

I have previously evaluated SentinelOne before using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

I'd advise others to use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint because it's a good solution with many experts behind it. Additionally, it's compatible and easy to use with Windows environments.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

Other

Our customers use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to protect their hybrid environments. We onboard the hybrid environment to the Azure Security posture with proper Intune integration. This setup ensures that devices are protected and secured with anti-malware, antivirus, and other protective measures. We deploy this primarily in hybrid environments.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides a unified management interface allowing customers to manage their on-premises and hybrid infrastructures from a single pane. The integration with Intune enables control over devices like laptops, enhancing security. Automated Investigation and Remediation features are vital for advanced threat protection and beneficial for device protection. The ability to manage both devices and users efficiently is advantageous.

One area that needs improvement is the integration cost of logs with external solutions like Sentinel, which can be expensive. Additionally, Microsoft could allow storing logs locally within the Defender panel to reduce costs. It would also be beneficial if policies could be configured without relying on Microsoft Entra ID, allowing for better integration with local directories.

I have been working with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for three to four years.

Sometimes devices do not sync properly with the Endpoint. We often need to diagnose whether the issue lies with the Endpoint or the device. This can delay proper deployment.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is stable with no major issues reported. However, syncing of devices sometimes encounters problems, requiring us to investigate the root causes.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable enough to handle various devices across environments, whether they are laptops, Android devices, or operating in hybrid environments. Customers mostly use it in hybrid setups.

The initial support process can be lacking as first-line support is sometimes not well-versed technically, resulting in repeated exchanges to finally engage a knowledgeable support person. This process is often slow and time-consuming.

Neutral

Setting up Microsoft Defender for Endpoint requires technical knowledge of Microsoft Entra ID and policy configurations. While it is not easy for all customers, skilled technical personnel can handle it without major issues.

The pricing of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is reasonable. It costs $15 per VM for the P2 plan, which is seen as affordable for customers. Additional add-ons are priced at $5.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a comprehensive and scalable solution for protecting on-premises and hybrid infrastructure. It provides strong protection and management capabilities. Customers are advised to use this solution for its robust features like advanced threat protection and easy integration with other Azure applications. I rate Defender for Endpoint nine out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

We use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint as an enterprise security solution.

The visibility is great. For example, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's portal has a section called threat analytics. There's a threat intelligence box. So all new threats and trending threats are visible. If any of our devices in our organization are susceptible to this threat, the solution will let us know because it searches for that specific particular vulnerability, which can be exploited. The Microsoft threat analytics tool gives us that type of visibility into the threats that might affect our organization. For example, the threat analysis updates every half hour to one hour with the top ten latest threats. The scan tries to ensure that these threats don't belong to our organization and if they do, it identifies the infected device. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint makes a lot of security recommendations when we onboard it to quarantine a lot of security recommendations that help to improve the security posture of our environment.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint assists our organization in prioritizing threats across our enterprise by providing security recommendations based on the weaknesses in our organization. It includes a department that provides management licenses and uses analytics to identify high-priority threats in our environment. This is connected to a common protocol that assigns a priority level of five to devices with vulnerabilities, indicating what actions should be taken. Thus, we have all the necessary information in one place.

Prioritization is crucial because there is a possibility of a high-priority threat entering our environment. This is how the solution determines the priority of threats. For instance, if one of our high-impact business devices is vulnerable to a top-priority security five threat we need to address it first. Alternatively, we may choose to address the sixty computers with a level two or three security threat, which are mostly associated with lower impacts. Therefore, prioritization aids in determining which critical business infrastructure requires immediate attention.

There are several lines with multiple solutions, but Microsoft offers a comprehensive solution with its E5 license. This license includes a wide range of features such as purview information protection, data protection, and other business-related tools. In my previous experience, I have noticed that some organizations utilize multiple Microsoft products, such as Defender for Endpoint, Identity Management, Defender for Cloud Applications, and Defender for IoT. This combination of different products can be quite useful.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud on Azure can be easily integrated with Defender for Endpoint, including on-premise solutions that can be onboarded to Azure with different subscription values. The integration will already onboard it to the device with Defender for Endpoint, along with additional features such as Just-in-Time Access, Defender for Vulnerability Management, and Control Sign-in Monitoring. These features provide robust cloud security monitoring and can be added to Defender for Endpoint. Moreover, Defender for Cloud is integrated with Defender for Endpoint portals, enabling a one-stop shop for onboarding devices with all the cloud posture management required for a single computer or software. This integration is highly beneficial, and other applications can be similarly integrated.

It is easy to integrate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint with other solutions.

These solutions seamlessly integrate to create a zero-trust platform, as offered by Microsoft. This platform ensures protection from various threats such as networks, applications, and infrastructure, with the added benefit of Microsoft Sentinel. The Sentinel tool combines threat analytics from multiple sources into a user-friendly workspace, providing optimal productivity. Additionally, sending logs from any of these products, including Sentinel, to the cloud connector is a simple process.

The integrated Microsoft security products offer comprehensive threat protection, such as Microsoft Defender for Office. With these products, our office is now able to identify and address email threats in a single platform, instead of checking each platform individually for application, identity, vulnerability management, and endpoint security. Moreover, these products can be easily integrated into a single workspace solution. With the help of pre-existing methods in Sentinel, we can efficiently handle a large number of alerts that we receive. Rather than going through each alert individually, we can activate a playbook that provides solutions for common alerts and takes actions in parallel to resolving them. This integration simplifies the process of achieving a complete security solution.

When we transition from on-premise servers to Azure ARC resources and activate Defender for Cloud Applications, it becomes easier to manage our servers from different networks, especially when it comes to security features. For example, we can check the compliance of our devices and organization with PCI DSS or other security protocols. Running compliance checks during the transition while syncing data with a different SL Cloud provides us with a significant amount of data and valuable information, including recommendations for improving compliance. This process involves bi-directional communication between devices, the cloud, Azure, and different network clouds.

Microsoft Sentinel allows us to easily ingest data from our entire ecosystem.

Microsoft Sentinel allows us to investigate threats and respond holistically from a single platform. Sentinel is both a SOAR and SIEM solution, meaning we can perform responses, but we must create a separate playbook for them. The default method may include some pre-built responses. The most important aspect is that if our company uses SentinelOne instead of Defender, we can still easily send logs through our Sentinel Workspace using API calls. This can be accomplished with a few connections, and we can create our own playbooks for different types of alerts. For example, if SentinelOne is not sending data, we can generate alerts of this type and respond accordingly. This significantly reduces user effort.

The security protection offered by Sentinel is extensive. It can be integrated with any Microsoft solutions, including information protection, and can be connected directly to Microsoft's threat intelligence sources and other resources. This allows for comprehensive protection.

Our clients have reported that Sentinel's cost and ease of use, in comparison to other stand-alone SIEM and SOAR solutions, are favorable. They find the user-friendliness of Sentinel to be worth the cost.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint assists in automating routine tasks and identifying high-value alerts. We can automate actions based on the alert's sensitivity, and in case we are uncertain of how to handle those alerts, we have the option to seek assistance from a Defender expert. This feature is particularly valuable, as it can provide guidance in identifying and investigating such alerts.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint helps eliminate multiple dashboards by giving us one XDR dashboard.

The solution's threat intelligence helps us detect and respond to threats proactively by identifying suspicious behavior.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been instrumental in saving us time by alerting us about potential threats and automatically guiding us through the necessary steps to eliminate them. The solution logs all the actions taken, saving us from having to spend valuable time retracing the steps.

By detecting threats in advance before they can propagate, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint helps our organization save money. The tool helps to identify potential security risks early, preventing their escalation and the associated costs of mitigation.

Our detection and response time has improved. This is thanks to Microsoft Defender, which has Endpoint Detection and Response capabilities. Before, we used to manually create policies to address security incidents, but now the system can automatically remediate issues without us having to intervene.

The most valuable aspect is the information, specifically the automatic investigation of packages. For instance, during an automated investigation, data and information are collected. Additionally, there is an encapsulated view that shows the origin of the package, how it was propagated, and any blockages or attacks that may have occurred. The most critical factor is the information gathered regarding various types of incidents, including how they are mapped and propagated, and what actions should be taken in response.

Creating antivirus profiles for Linux is a more challenging task compared to other operating systems. The profiling method currently in use is not very user-friendly and has ample scope for improvement.

I have been using the solution for over four years.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is stable.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can scale effectively to meet the needs of our environment, regardless of its size.

The technical support team is highly knowledgeable, and in cases where they are unable to provide a solution, they escalate the issue to the second level of support. Their services are available around the clock, and if the assigned representative is unavailable, they promptly transfer the ticket to another capable person to ensure a seamless resolution of the issue.

Positive

I previously utilized SentinelOne, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response, and Carbon Black CB Defense. However, I find Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to be more user-friendly than the other solutions. The information provided by Defender is valuable, and the deployment process is easy. Additionally, it offers several valuable features.

The complexity of deployment depends on the client's environment. The number of people required for the deployment depends on the number of servers the organization has. For example, in a deployment of 700 workstations and 500 servers, one full-time and two part-time consultants are required.

We implement the solution for our clients in-house.

We experienced a positive return on investment by using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. This solution allows us to streamline our operations by consolidating all necessary components under a single umbrella and eliminating the need for additional vendors and extra costs.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is included with a Microsoft E5 license.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

The most cost-effective and user-friendly option for security is a single-vendor security suite. This approach also eliminates the need for multiple integrations.

I recommend that organizations avail themselves of Microsoft's trials and demos, and compare Defender with other solutions in their environment to determine the best fit. With a Microsoft E5 license, organizations can access all of Microsoft's solutions and use whatever they need.

On-premises

We use it to protect our servers and endpoints, which include our employees' laptops and our own endpoint portal, where we see the single pane of glass reports. It is our first line of defense.

We have seen improvement in all our endpoint vulnerabilities, which is very crucial for us. If this had not been implemented, we would be in trouble because our endpoints would be unprotected. It has definitely improved the security posture of our organization.

Also, automated investigation, protection, and alerts have affected our security operations in a positive way. We get to see the vulnerabilities quicker, and we get to see the root cause analysis as well.

Defender for Endpoint has also eliminated having to look at multiple dashboards. The Endpoint portal is sufficient. It is easier for our security operations team to look at the vulnerabilities and reports and plan for remediation actions.

In addition, the moment the solution's threat intelligence provides a suspicious IP or a suspicious URL, we block it right away. We are more secure. It has helped our security operations detect things in advance and preempt any vulnerabilities.

We have seen productivity gains in terms of the mean time to resolve issues, on the order of 20 to 30 percent. We have the unified dashboarding and reporting, the investigation, and automated remediation. Saving 20 percent of our time translates to saving money.

The detection features are valuable, as is the fact that it is easier to port these logs into Sentinel. That is also useful for us. It is more comprehensive.

The visibility into threats that Defender for Endpoint provides us with is quite deep and mature. The threats that we find help us understand our vulnerabilities and remediate them if required.

Another very important point is that it prioritizes threats across our enterprise. This is important; the solution is the first line of defense. Defender for Endpoint is very crucial for our defense, considering that we all work remotely.

We also use Defender for Cloud, Purview, and Microsoft Sentinel; all of these are integrated and go into Sentinel. It was easy to integrate them because we are using Azure Cloud, and all of them are native to Azure Cloud. The connectors also make it easy. The fact that these solutions work natively together, providing coordinated detection and response, is very important to us. That is precisely why we got into Azure. This does provide us with a comprehensive view of the threats, incidents, alerts, investigations, and threat-hunting processes. Overall, it gives us multiple ways of securing things.

If the solution could be integrated more with Defender for Cloud, to be more unified, that would help. It is good now, but even more integration could be done with Defender for Cloud. We see two different portals. If Defender for Endpoint could be ported to the CSPM, Defender for Cloud, that would make things even easier for us.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for three years.

We have never had any downtime or any other issues.

We have scaled up to 3,000 endpoints, and there is scope for it to be scaled more. When more employees join or more departments come in, we'll be scaling up.

Defender for Endpoint's technical support is fairly good. We haven't encountered many problems with them. We initially had some problems when we integrated Sentinel, but that was resolved internally.

Positive

We did not have another EDR solution. We started with Azure.

The deployment was straightforward because it's all native. We are integrating within the Azure environment, so it is easy.

This solution specifically would have taken a week or so to deploy, but it was part of our overall deployment along with the other Microsoft products. After a week, we started utilizing or pushing the data into our security operations.

We had multiple servers and laptops that were endpoints to be protected by Defender for Endpoint, almost 3,000 endpoints. We had to go one by one. Initially, we implemented 500, and eventually we built on top of that.

It doesn't require much maintenance unless we add more endpoints. That's when we need to push it. Otherwise, there is not much activity involved.

It was all done in-house and required three full-time resources.

We have easily seen 20 to 30 percent savings, year on year.

They would have definitely evaluated other solutions, but the clear preference for a native solution is what made this stand out.

A single-vendor security suite has its advantages in terms of ease of porting, ease of connecting to the SOC, and also dashboarding. For ease of use, a single vendor strategy is valuable. But cost-wise, if you go for multiple vendors, you may be able to negotiate the cost, but that approach makes things difficult to integrate.

It detects suspicious malware and credential access issues, and it even maps to the Mitre ATT&CK framework. It's a pretty good product. Try it out and implement it as soon as possible.