Scribd
Upload
52 views2 pages

Comparision Kaspersky Vs Sophos

Kaspersky KICS is designed for OT/ICS environments, supporting legacy systems with strong offline capabilities and a focus on operational safety, while Sophos Intercept X XDR targets modern IT endpoints with cloud-native deployment and advanced threat detection. Kaspersky offers lightweight performance with manual setup and customization, whereas Sophos provides extensive third-party integration and automated response features. Both solutions have their strengths and weaknesses, with Kaspersky prioritizing industrial safety and Sophos focusing on IT security and recovery capabilities.

Uploaded by

nrajkumar.org
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
52 views2 pages

Comparision Kaspersky Vs Sophos

Kaspersky KICS is designed for OT/ICS environments, supporting legacy systems with strong offline capabilities and a focus on operational safety, while Sophos Intercept X XDR targets modern IT endpoints with cloud-native deployment and advanced threat detection. Kaspersky offers lightweight performance with manual setup and customization, whereas Sophos provides extensive third-party integration and automated response features. Both solutions have their strengths and weaknesses, with Kaspersky prioritizing industrial safety and Sophos focusing on IT security and recovery capabilities.

Uploaded by

nrajkumar.org
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Category Kaspersky KICS Sophos Intercept X XDR

Target Environment OT/ICS Nodes & Workstations (PLZ, RTU, HMI) IT End points (Laptops, Desktop & Servers)
Environment Compatibility Legacy OS, air-gapped, low resource systems Modern IT systems only
OS Support Windows XP+ & Legacy OS Support Windows7+, macOS, Linux

Can be resource-heavy
CPU Usage Signature-based detection, Minimal, <5% under normal conditions.
Moderate, occasional spikes during remediation or rollback.

Memory Usage ~200-400 MB ~200–300 MB


Performance Impact Ultra-lightweight for Industrial Control Systems & Workstations Medium Weight designed for IT Nodes & Workstations
Offline Capability Strong (air-gapped, no updates required often) Limited (needs connecivity for full XDR)
Mostly on-premise (some cloud options)
Ease of Deployment More manual setup required Fully cloud-native with lightweight agents and easy deployment.
On-prem focused, limited cloud capabilities

A. Comprehensive UI, slightly complex for manage. A. Comprehensive UI, slightly complex for manage.
Ease of Management
B.Customization as per requirements B. Limited customization

Risk Focus Operational disruption, compliance (IEC/NIST) Cyber breach, ransomware, lateral movement
Protocol Awareness Industrial Protocols (Modbus, OPC, IEC) No Active Support for OT protocols
Impact on System Noticeable during scans. Lightweight with minimal impact.
Threat Detection Behavioral + Signature-less for OT anomalies Behaviour + Signature based for IT threats
Device Impact Lightweight, low-impact for sensitive OT Systems High resource use, not suitable for OT
Offline Capability Works fully offline requires cloud connectivity for full functionality
Threat Intelligence OT/ICS Focused (ICS CERT) IT Focused
Certification & Safety Certified for industrial use, pirorites availablility Not certified for use in OT environment
Asset Visibility OT Asset discovery and Monitoring No native OT asset visibility
Updates/Patch Policy Configurable, manual-safe modes for uptime standard patch cycles may interrupt operations
Bottom Line Purpose-built to protect safety, uptime, and legacy OT Systems Designed for modern IT, not industrial systems

Response and Remediation – Every genuine incident is reported, with


Strengths Autonomous response, rollback capabilities
recommendations on how to respond to the detected threats.

A. More traditional in approach, with a heavier reliance on signature-


Weaknesses Higher resource usage during recovery tasks.
based detection
A. Signature-based + heuristic detection
Approach B. No rollback feature Behavioral detection blocks ransomware activity before encryption.
C. Mostly post-infection mitigation

Reporting Capabilities Standard, customizable, Telemetry statistics,Number of incidents Advanced, including rollback event reports.

Third-Party Integration Integrates with third-party ecosystem. Extensive third-party ecosystem.


SIEM Integration REST API for integration SIEM-friendly with prebuilt integrations.
Good for on-premise security where cloud-based solutions are not a
EDR Functionality Best-in-class EDR with cloud-native threat hunting.
priority.
Recovery Capabilities Blocks encryption attempts proactively. Restores files and system states post-attack.
24/7 Monitoring Yes Yes
a. 24x7 access to Kaspersky SOC analysts
Threat Hunting b. Incident creation for further investigation by the SOC team. REST Included, by the Falcon OverWatch team.
API for integration with IRP / SOAR
Threat Response Collaborative, Kaspersky+ analysts handle response. Fully managed, Falcon team takes control.

You might also like