Symantec Endpoint Encryption Reviews

It is good for encryption and USB devices.

The systems are quite integrated.

The problem with Symantec is that we have solutions that overlap. So sometimes we don't know which solution to use.

We have been using this solution for about five years.

it is quite stable. 

Scalability isn't applicable here because it is an endpoint encryption tool. We have about 200 people using the solution. Our usage will increase if we get new employees.

We used McAfee Disk Encryption in the past.

It was hard to install and took us about three months. The installation was outsourced.

It has annual licensing.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten, and I recommend doing a POC before implementing it.

I like the management aspect of this solution. You don't want to have end-users tweak or set it themselves, so the fact that you could do it from a central point helped us a lot.

We really liked the vanilla flavor set up. It is stable as well.

What I didn't find helpful in the version we used is the fact that all devices had to be on the same network for us to push through the encryption. With lockdowns and people working from home nowadays because of the COVID-19 pandemic, there's no way to deploy a solution in that manner.

It should be easier to classify documents that should be encrypted, that is, to create policies for documents that should be encrypted. Maybe, it should be according to departments as well.

Customization should be a bit more granular because nowadays, things are very dynamic. Environments are very fluid. So, the policies should reflect that.

In terms of the policies you can apply, there should be a bit more granularity to it, and it should be something that you can turn on and turn off as needed.

I had used Symantec Endpoint Encryption for three months. We used the version before the last version.

It is a stable solution.

For me, the initial setup was intuitive, but then again, I'd had experience with deploying software for 10 years prior to that point.

Back then, deploying software was not like what it is today; it was much harder. You had to do a lot more customization. However, I have a lot experience, so I wouldn't have been phased by any issue I may have encountered.

I'm in Nigeria, and we also serve Ghana, Sierra Leone, Kenya, and a bit of South Africa. Whenever you're deploying security solutions such as Symantec Endpoint Encryption, there has to be a lot more focus on sensitizing the people who are going to be affected.

We train the IT staff on how to manage it, but we don't train the end-users on what it involves and the advantages of the solution. We also don't inform them of the changes they may have to make in terms of their behavior, how they access data, how they use the data, etc. We need to let them know that it doesn't mean that they are completely secure. The biggest issue about security is human error. So, I think sensitizing the users should also go hand in hand with deployment.

I would rate Symantec Endpoint Encryption at eight on a scale from one to ten.

I used this solution to protect my workstation from malware and other threats such as viruses and worms. It is very useful.

The most valuable feature is the ease of use.

The stability is good and it is easy to upgrade.

The security could be improved.

I have been working with Symantec Endpoint Encryption for six months.

The stability is good.

This product is very easy to install.

I can install and set up this solution on my own. It is quick to deploy, taking perhaps five minutes.

The license is not very expensive.

This is absolutely a product that I recommend.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I don't manage the solution. I don't manage the console and everything. However, password recovery is the best, the easiest part. 

The solution is pretty stable.

If it could offer seamless upgrades to seamlessly do the switching that would be great. That's the pain point here now. The setup time takes quite a while sometimes. The encryption, once you install a new computer, takes a few hours to encrypt. From our testing, it feels like nothing is being restored, however, it's actually running in the background. 

We'd like to switch from Symantec due to the fact that the switching part is a pain. If we want to switch our Windows it will be a pain to do that. We have thousands of machines. It would be a hassle if you have to switch every time to do that.

The initial setup is a bit complex.

I've worked with the solution for quite some time already. I was using it before I transferred to this current team. I'm not sure for how long it has been at this point. I've used it for some time already.

The stability seems to be okay. It works as it was designed to. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

I can't speak to the scalability. We have about 2,000 people on the solution currently, however, I cannot speak to the scaling process or if we have ever attempted to scale it. We likely won't increase usage.

In terms of technical support, we don't really engage with them. There are not many issues with it. It's just the Windows update that gives us issues. That's the only issue, the main issue. Other than that, there hasn't been a reason to engage with them directly and therefore I can't speak to their level of responsiveness or knowledgeability.

The Symantec setup is a bit complex. It takes time. It is simple, but it takes time. It also takes a bit longer when creating the profiles at first.

It is my understanding that we handled everything in-house. I do not recall using an integrator or consultant.

We pay on a yearly basis. The cost isn't much, however, if we switch to BitLocker there may be some cost savings there as well.

We are currently considering a switch to Bitlocker due to the issues we are facing with updates. It could potentially save us money as well. BitLocker has different types of cost charging depending on which model you choose. We are in the process of evaluation right now.

We are a customer and end-user.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. It's not the latest one. I understand the latest one will be able to go page Windows - which we also partnered with. The problem is not all our machines are on the latest version. We are looking to see if we switch to the latest one. In a few years, Microsoft will likely change to a new version again. Then we will be having the same problem again.

It's best to align with Microsoft so that we do not have to do so many changes. Not catching up with Windows is also a risk currently due to the Microsoft Edge issue now. Without the latest Windows version, we cannot use the latest Edge version.

I'd rate the solution at a five out of ten overall. It works okay, however, the switching part and initial setup make it an undesirable option for us.

Its management is good, and it is also scalable and mostly stable.

Its decryption time needs to be improved. Currently, its decryption time is very long, and it takes double time than encryption. They need to work on that. Its encryption time is fine.

I have been using this solution for four to five years. I am using its latest version.

There are minor challenges related to the updates for Windows and Mac systems, but it is mostly stable.

It is scalable.

I didn't contact their technical support.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Symantec Endpoint Encryption an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for endpoint security.

Symantec Endpoint is good. We have been using it for more than five years and haven't had any trouble with it. It protects us without any issues.

In India, I am based out of Bangalore and my corporate office is in Lucknow, and we never had any compromises on the security site. Our firewall is very strong and all the devices are protected by Symantec. It does a really great job.

The solution is great for large-scale deployments.

The solution is pretty low maintenance and you rarely need the assistance of technical support.

The solution does slow down the device a little bit, once it's installed.

The Windows 10 comes with Defender. It has its own security layer. It's supposed to protect desktops and laptops running Windows 10. Right now, our question is, what is the additional protection we get from using any other antivirus or other packages on these machines? Symantec isn't really making it clear how they add to or enhance the level of protection we'd get from them if we kept them with Defender already on Windows 10.

We've been using the solution for five years.

The stability is good in the sense that we've never been compromised. It just runs in the background and is scanning. However, when scans do happen, it can slow down the machine. That's typical, and it only does it a little bit.

The solution is deployed on a large scale as we operate 1,000 locations in India and it's at all of them. You can't just protect the branch office, you need to protect every device in every office.

I've never needed to contact technical support.

The corporate office is in Lucknow, and I'm the technical director of a corporate group. I operate from Bangalore. I don't actually deal with the vendors or with the technical support team. My corporate team in Lucknow may be talking to some technical person at Symantec, however, I'm not aware of that. My responsibility is to advise someone on the technology side, so I heavily depend upon the reports and all that's available in public domain. 

I'm not sure what was evaluated beforehand. However, we are evaluating other options currently.

In September, our Symantec license is expiring, so we are looking at if there's anything else in Symantec's product library that we should try or if there are any better options than we should consider. Currently, I'm trying to download some reports to compare Symantec with other solutions as part of some initial research.

We've looked at a few different solutions. We hear that end devices like laptops or desktops are a bit slow when you have Norton installed. AVG looks to have fewer resources although it looks to be a little bit quicker than Norton and doesn't bring your system speed down. Windows 10 also already comes with Defender, so protection would be built right in.

We only use the solution on our own endpoints for our own company and don't necessarily deploy it for clients.

There are a lot of companies in India who are promoting these types of products. They may have quite a good idea about the packages and so on, what you can do, what you can't do and so on. Everyone seems well educated on it. It is not a very complicated solution. It's basically solid. 

You don't need that much technical support. Whether it's Symantec or TrendMicro or AVG or any other package it's all pretty self-sustaining. You'll simply notice it when you have a compromise, at which point you get alerted and then you look at what went wrong. Until you are compromised, you're happy with the product.

I approve of Symantec Endpoint. I've been happy with the solution for the last four or five years. There have been no issues and we have not been compromised until now. I'd definitely recommend Symantec.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It does tend to slow down a machine when it does the scan. However, I've noticed the same slow down on competition like Norton or AVG and it doesn't slow anything down near as much as Norton.

We are currently working with companies in the financial sector which is why we are using this on-premises solution, because their compliance policies do not allow for cloud-based servers. Our clients are using the full encryptions. They're using Symantec Endpoint Encryption to secure their data. If someone loses their laptop, for example, they can wipe their disk and save their data from ending up with a third party.

I like all the features in Symantec Endpoint because they provide four or five features for end-users. They have three consoles for managing the data. Symantec also provides the licensing with the software. There is no need to enter the licensing or install files manually because it's bundled with the software. This is a good feature. Also, you get updates and other encrypted files easily. I also like the manage keys.

There is no need to add any features, because they are developing their own encryption methods.

Currently, all the software has been managed by BitLocker, but Windows does not suit every encryption management software. 

There are many apps that do that kind of thing. All the features are there so I don't think that needs to be on encryption software. I'm working with some end point management software and they are managing the software and connections, what can be installed and what is restricted, etc... But more features need to be included in the encryption software.

I have been using Symantec Endpoint Encryption for one year.

Their scalability is good. They are using three consoles and have full-consoling end point users for our solutions.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate Symantec Endpoint an eight.

This solution is used predominately for data protection. We want to protect our data in case it is lost, or if we are replacing or upgrading hardware.

The most valuable feature is that it works in the background so that the end-users are not aware of what is happening on the laptop.

I do not find the environment to be very user-friendly.

The technical support is not very good, especially for issues involving the encryption.

If the user loses their encryption key then the process for recovering it is complicated and should be made simpler.

During the last upgrade, I experienced some data corruption on my laptop. I was unable to view the data, nor get support from Symantec.

I have been using Symantec Endpoint Encryption for about ten years.

I would rate the stability as good. We use this solution on an occasional basis.

With respect to scalability, we have had some hardware compatibility issues.

We have more than 1,000 users.

My team is in regular contact with technical support, although I have had no direct involvement with them. I do not find them to be very good.

The initial setup is of medium difficulty. It is neither simple nor complex.

The cost of this solution is a little on the higher side.

After implementing Symantec Endpoint Encryption we have been exploring alternate vendors to look at additional features like application protection. One of these solutions is the native Windows 10 BitLocker, and I am also evaluating a product by Dell.

I do not recommend Symantec Endpoint Encryption. The support needs to be improved.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

Our primary use is implementing the solution for our clients. We are an official partner for Symantec and implement it for clients but we are also using that same solution. Most of the clients are on-premises installations although we do have some clients using cloud and hybrid-cloud deployments.  

So between our clients and their usage, we have experience with representatives who are using all the server deployment types. But the vast majority still stay with the on-premises deployment. This is especially true for banking customers who have stricter requirements for regulatory compliance.  

From the commercial side when I'm talking with our customers about Symantec, I talk about how it is a true enterprise-wide solution. Symantec Endpoint Encryption is an all-in-one solution that is completely expandable. With this product, Symantec addresses enterprise concepts. They developed an enterprise solution, they understand and have a good sense of enterprise requirements, they help you manage a huge number of users, they made solutions for the user to sync their enterprise databases and assign data policies, and they have features for blocking access. All the solutions for this Symantec product are integrated into one place. All of these features make it easier to help convince the customer about the quality and utility of this Symantec solution.  

From the technical side, I am fine with the features as they are, I am not sure where they might have the need for improvement, and I don't have a solid opinion about it. For the Symantec company and products, they need to engage in more marketing activities in the Middle East because they are not focusing on our needs.  

They need some stability in their own business structure because they have been buying a lot of companies that go out of the market. There are so many changes that Symantec makes that the ordering systems become affected. Sometimes it has been nightmarish to just finish transactions on Symantec systems because of all the product fluctuation. They need to review the channel procedures, their internal procedures from the distributor and have some activities with their consumers to be more aware of the market.  

I think in general that they need to be more conscious of the potential in the Middle East and have a better presence, but I don't know what else they can provide as far as functionality. From my standpoint, all that I need, I found in their solution. The product itself is very good but they have organizational issues.  

I've been working with Symantec Endpoint Encryption for longer than 10 years.  

There is no problem with product stability. The company stability is another issue. The parent company needs better organization. It does have some effect on the end-user, but that is not the stability of the product itself.  

I personally think that the pricing is fair. On the other hand, and I think it is because the company is not stable from the division perspective that there are some issues in the price list and with the distributor in Egypt. They have some workarounds for this to mitigate the issue. But in the past, the company and the pricing were more stable than nowadays.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Symantec Endpoint Encryption as an eight out of ten. There is room for improvement and I think they need to make more effort here, but I would still totally recommend Symantec products and I'm a fan of Endpoint Encryption as a mature solution.  

We are using three of the product's modules. We are using encryption for messaging, we are using encryption for shared folders and we are using encryption for our hard drives.

The product has helped our organization by providing encryption options. For example, it is better to have encrypted messages because it is more secure. With the module for the shared folders, we can decide to use it as an addition to our active directory. So we can give users different rights within the active directory. The different set of rules we create in PGP is like an add-on to our active directory and again provides more secure access and restriction of access to some information.

The most valuable features are the messaging features and shared folders.

The hard drive encryption needs to be improved. There is an issue, for example, where we cannot easily do Microsoft updates. The updates stop before the PGP reboot is complete. So when PGP encryption from the hard drive is active, we can't update Microsoft Windows. As a work-around, we have to decrypt the encrypted hard drive, which takes an hour every time, and then do the updates and then encrypt again. It is time-consuming and there must be a better solution.

One other improvement I would like to see is the ability to get support directly from the seller. There should be a better way to open tickets directly from the seller to eliminate delays and have a better way that we can contact them and get help when we need it. Technical support is a problem.

We have been using Symantec Endpoint Encryption since 2013, or about six years.

It is not a very stable product based on our experience with how we use it. It is mostly the disk encryption issues and how long it takes to do Microsoft updates. So we actually open some tickets at technical support and also with the integrator who initially installed the system for us. So currently we are dissatisfied and we are looking at BitLocker instead of the PGP only for drive encryption. As it is a Microsoft product, it makes sense that it will work better with Microsoft updates.

The scalability of the product is fine. With PGP servers we can link the Windows account, active directory account with PGP so when I do an installation on a computer, all I have to do is open the profile of the new employee's machine and it is linked to a server. It doesn't matter how many people I link in. We currently have 40 people and the product is installed on all our computers. Most people in our company are consultants who work on the premises of our clients. They are not located within our offices.

We have contacted technical support in the past with specific issues but we haven't received any answer yet. So my impression is naturally that the technical support is not great.

We are currently looking at Kaspersky Endpoint Encryption for Business Events. I am actually doing testing with a free license that we have access to for 30 days. We are doing this in order to look at the value of the solution, functionalities of the software and if it can apply to our architecture.

Right now we are using Kaspersky but on individual bases. It's not centralized, so each computer has its own Kaspersky security model, but what we want is to be able to manage all the computers in our infrastructure from a central point entry. So that's why we are looking at that specific software. Symantec is not solving all our issues sufficiently.

We are also considering looking into BitLocker to perhaps replace the disk encryption module in Symantec Endpoint Encryption because it is not easy to use.

I wasn't with the company when the product was installed, but I presume the initial setup was complex. The deployment of the product usually takes very little time. I installed the software for new computers and I encrypt the disks. That is all that has to be done so the installation of the product is very quick. It is the encryption of the disk that takes time.

The installation was done by a consultant in 2013.

I am not sure of the licensing fees. I presume there are packages based on what you use. We have three modules (for messaging, disk encryption and shared folders). I believe there are five modules, but we have three out of five. The price scales depending on the number of modules that we use.

My advice to others who are considering this solution is to make sure that they do some testing if they are using disk encryption as we have had problems with updates. Our problem may depend on the version of Windows. So it may be different for other people. I didn't choose to use encryption before, so I learned a lot about the performance and the principle of encryption when it comes to messaging and share folders. So that part is good.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Symantec Endpoint Encryption as a six currently. The main problem for us is working with Microsoft updates within PGP. This should be possible because BitLocker is currently doing that which might be a reason we would switch. Updates for Microsoft OS are very complicated for us right now.