Centralized AV for Server 2012


Recommended Posts

Hello folks,

I'm just wondering if there is a AV product out yet that is designed for Server 2012 environments. I'd like to be able to deploy AV clients to Windows 7, Vista, and XP machines on my LAN via my Server 2012 box. Based on the small amount of reading I've done, FEP doesn't yet support Server 2012. Are there other alternatives?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1135814-centralized-av-for-server-2012/
Share on other sites

FEP is now System Center 2012 Endpoint Protection and does have support in System Center 2012 SP1 for both Win8 and Server 2012.

I haven't installed System Center yet, so I can't say how well it works or licensing for System Center itself. We have an EES Agreement for MS, so it's not bad for us.

I can't speak for alternatives. We just got Server 2012 installed around the first of the year and haven't got too in-depth yet.

Hello,

I would think that just about any anti-malware vendor that has a Microsoft Windows 8 compatible product out has a Windows Server 2012 compatible product out, or at least one that is going through the certification process right now.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

Kaspersky Endpoint Security 10 for Windows (for file servers) supports Server 2012

http://support.kaspersky.com/kes10fs#requirements

Just go with Kaspersky.

Symantec Endpoint Protection 12.1.2 is also compatible (also a lot cheaper than Kaspersky)

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH195325

http://www.symantec.com/connect/articles/latest-symantec-endpoint-protection-releases-symantec-endpoint-protection-121-ru2

ESET has solutions for server core, server, client, gateway etc supports the latest windows editions with remote administration and update mirroring.

please go with a better program than system center. I am testing out system center and I see it as a very unintuitive pain in the rear package. ease of use as well as ability to protect your systems should be your goal, and from what I am reading it can't protect your systems and it isn't very easy to use (initially).

please go with a better program than system center. I am testing out system center and I see it as a very unintuitive pain in the rear package. ease of use as well as ability to protect your systems should be your goal, and from what I am reading it can't protect your systems and it isn't very easy to use (initially).

Huh? How exactly is SCEP or FEP more complicated than any other antimalware package that has centralized control and reporting over multiple platforms? I've been using it since before it was integrated with SCCM 2007 R3, and SCEP/FEP itself is pretty damn easy to manage. You don't even require SCCM if you don't want centralized reporting, you can use a GPO instead (mind, I haven't bothered doing a GPO for it since SCCM 2012 was released).

I currently have SCEP deployed to over 500 systems running Mac OS 10.8, Mac OS 10.7, Windows 8 & 2012, Windows 7 & 2008 R2, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux. I'm extremely happy with it now that it supports every platform I also support. Any entity supports many platforms should definitely give SCEP consideration.

I won't deny that Configuration Manager as an entire entity is a beast, but I'd say the Antimalware components of it are pretty damn easy, and very powerful from an Administrative viewpoint.

FEP is now System Center 2012 Endpoint Protection and does have support in System Center 2012 SP1 for both Win8 and Server 2012.

I haven't installed System Center yet, so I can't say how well it works or licensing for System Center itself. We have an EES Agreement for MS, so it's not bad for us.

I have the EES Enterprise Agreement. If you are on this tier of the EES already, SCEP is extremely cheap to implement for desktops. You?ll probably just need one System Center Suite Standard or Datacenter license, and you can then use all aspects of System Center against your desktops. Costs may go up a fair bit however if you plan to support servers with it, as it?s highly unlikely your existing agreement covers server management CAL's unless some aspect of your infrastructure is already supported by System Center.

It?s been a very long time since I was on the EES Standard Agreement, but if you are on that agreement, you may find you only have partial desktop management coverage. It may cover part of System Center, but is unlikely to cover all of it. Either way, talk to your vendor to discover the limits of your existing agreement.

it is the sccm as a whole. it really is a pain...

Lets go into deploying a client...where is the verification in the admin console that it has been pushed successfully, it has been installed successfully, or if it failed for that matter. Lets go into managing a client that may or may not have the client pushed, how do you tell it was pushed, how do you tell it wasn't, how do you tell if it is in the process of. Lets go into attempting to view anything...connection fails because of a firewall issue..all the ports are open, hell the firewall is disabled...how can it be a firewall issue???

Just about every other management console based software has a way to monitor deployments from start to finish and have a way to be able to tell exactly what is stopping them for the admin to fix the issue. I have used many, kaseya, altiris, level platforms, and labtech and all of them you can tell what is going on at any given point during just about whatever you are doing and you get things like logs and error codes. If ms would just steal one of these management suites it would be beneficial to the rest of us.

If you care to prove differently I have a nice test environment that shows otherwise and would be more than happy to give you a brief tour of what I am complaining about.

  • 3 weeks later...

it is the sccm as a whole. it really is a pain...

Lets go into deploying a client...where is the verification in the admin console that it has been pushed successfully, it has been installed successfully, or if it failed for that matter. Lets go into managing a client that may or may not have the client pushed, how do you tell it was pushed, how do you tell it wasn't, how do you tell if it is in the process of. Lets go into attempting to view anything...connection fails because of a firewall issue..all the ports are open, hell the firewall is disabled...how can it be a firewall issue???

Just about every other management console based software has a way to monitor deployments from start to finish and have a way to be able to tell exactly what is stopping them for the admin to fix the issue. I have used many, kaseya, altiris, level platforms, and labtech and all of them you can tell what is going on at any given point during just about whatever you are doing and you get things like logs and error codes. If ms would just steal one of these management suites it would be beneficial to the rest of us.

If you care to prove differently I have a nice test environment that shows otherwise and would be more than happy to give you a brief tour of what I am complaining about.

Windows already has a gigantic servicing engine that logs just about anything, and an SCCM task sequence can monitor this - in addition, a task sequence that uses MDT integration offers even more (logging and TS customization). As someone who's used most of the deployment products out there at this point, SCCM is in fact at least as powerful and configurable, and the fact it's a lifecycle management product (versus just an OSD product) makes it (and SCEP) worth the price when coupled with the other products in the suite. If you need a management console to troubleshoot for you, you're already behind the 8 ball as you're trusting information from someone or something that may or may not be the OS making judgement calls on failures. Any SCCM OSD should have pre-flight checks so that if failures are going to occur, you catch (and log) them before you start touching the client machine to be (re)installed.

I'd put SCCM and SCEP (+DCM, NAP, and DA) up against any lifecycle management product any day of the week - heck, you get licensing to SCOM and Orchestrator as well with your System Center purchase, which also means endpoint monitoring, reporting, and automation as desired based on things like performance data, event logs, and DCM / NAP configuration.

Honestly, most environments that fail to get the most out of the System Center suite (especially with the 2012 version) comes down to the admins not knowing how to set it up and manage it properly, rather than the software.

We mainly use sccm for the remote control feature, a simple feature that any of these products support. Sccm fails at connecting almost 40 percent of the time. Some random error about firewall or network connectivity. I can connect with any other software pushing clients to the computer even connecting with rdp, but sccm ha an issue. This is random, sometimes it connects and sometimes it doesn't. If it can't do something this simple we cannot trust it to do anything else.

Firewall is not an issue, we completely disabled it as a test, Dns isn't an issue we can connect to the computer many different ways, network connectivity isn't an issue see previous comment. It doesn't give an error to properly troubleshoot this. We cannot trust a product like this but my predecessor decided this was a good product to go with and we are stuck with something that works half assed.

For craps and giggles, I created a 2012 sccm server in a test environment, that same issue may or may not be there but after I push there is no status on the console to tell you what/where the install is or if it failed or succeeded. He'll I can push to a pc that has been retired, no error no status, nothing. And you probably will see this as no problem....while this is a small environmental test of around 50 live, the production is several thousand some are turned off in the it closet that won't be deployed. The push from sccm is very poorly designed. I would even say the the remote tools also fall in that category. I wouldn't trust this for a proper inventory or to push packages out.

I deal with environments of 100,000 PCs or more, and setting up reporting (real time and otherwise) isn't that hard. Push works fine, and reporting does too. If you're seeing retired machines still in SCCM, or having issues pushing packages, that would be an issue to be investigated. Perhaps it's easier for me because I do it for a living and know how to use SQL reporting and SQL in general.

It is very easy for me to recommend other utilities because I too do it for a living and have been exposed to many tools not just given one package and told to deal with it. I see it from the user side, the admin side, and the tech side. I can't say with 100% certainty that this package is good or worth the money. I have seen many packages from initial testing to production roll out and have trained many. I can tell you in this environment this system doesn't work properly. it is my first go at sccm which was preinstalled to me coming in and dealing with it. From what I see this is a very cumbersome, unfriendly, and near hostile piece of software. For a tool that is supposed to help you it does a lot of fighting against you and makes you job counter productive.

I can honestly say the Sophos, still, by far was the easiest to setup and configure. I have been busy testing AV suites over the past few days and I still vote for Sophos for large networks.

Sophos might be easy to set up, but it's performance impact compared to just about any other A/V product is pretty horrible. There's more to an A/V product than how easy it is to manage.

For what it's worth, other than FEP/SCEP, the very latest Symantec A/V release (12.1.2) actually has a very light performance impact for a good A/V product.

Sophos might be easy to set up, but it's performance impact compared to just about any other A/V product is pretty horrible. There's more to an A/V product than how easy it is to manage.

For what it's worth, other than FEP/SCEP, the very latest Symantec A/V release (12.1.2) actually has a very light performance impact for a good A/V product.

That was the opposite for my setup. Mine was very low resource usage.

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello folks,

I'm just wondering if there is a AV product out yet that is designed for Server 2012 environments. I'd like to be able to deploy AV clients to Windows 7, Vista, and XP machines on my LAN via my Server 2012 box. Based on the small amount of reading I've done, FEP doesn't yet support Server 2012. Are there other alternatives?

That's because FEP was pretty much replaced by System Center Endpoint Protection (it's the same product, actually) - it's why I'm having to get my feet wet with SCCM for my virtualization test lab. The test lab will have a mixed bag of Windows and Linux clients (I'm adding a Sabayon 11 client right now as I type this). I'm hoping to not need to do a kitchen-sink; preferably, I'll only need CM/EP and VMM along with their prereqs. I have SQL Server 2012 Express SP1 installed with the defaults (it will only be used by System Center). Now I'm trying to figure out the proper settings for SCVMM to link to the SQL Server Express DE - for some reason, I get no warnings, yet the install always bombs connecting to the DE.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!