We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiSandbox and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The technical support is very good."
"The solution is very good because it catches a lot of threats in emails."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"What I find most valuable, is that it is easy to use."
"The dynamic behavior analysis is excellent. We have many attacks caught by the FortiSandbox as zero-day attacks. Additionally, the administration is simple and can be customized to fit your companies needs."
"The solution is easy to manage."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox is scalable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The solution can scale."
"I also like its logging method. Its logging is very powerful and useful for forensic purposes. You can see the traffic or a specific activity or how something entered your network and where it went."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"The most valuable feature is MVX, which tests all of the files that have been received in an email."
"Improved our systems and our customers' by providing better malware protection, defense against zero-day threats, and improved network security."
"If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from how it allows users to do the investigation part. Another important part of the product that is valuable is associated with how it gives information to users in the form of a storyline."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiSandbox is complex. You cannot only deploy Fortinet FortiSandbox without deploying the stack of Fortinet solutions. The implementation and integration are challenging tasks with the device and placement in the network. We needed to do POC and offloading testing."
"There could be more templates and a higher number of simulated VMs to configure more use cases. Sometimes we need to configure many use cases in many different environments, and if the number of VMs that we configure is limited, we have to remove some and reconfigure the environment if we need another environment."
"It can be difficult if you need to use the Command Line Interface (CLI). It's much easier if you only have to deal with the GUI."
"The delivery feature in my country is extremely bad."
"In future releases, I would like to see more automation capabilities."
"The area I would like this solution to be improved in is the integrations for Sandbox with AI and big data ML mechanisms. I think this would be a practical improvement."
"If we can have more dashboards, it would be good."
"In the next release, I would like to see machine learning and anti-exploitation included."
"It would be great if we could create granular reports based on the protocols, types of attacks, regions of attack, etc. Also we would like to easily be able to add exceptions to rules in cases of false positives."
"The world is currently shifting to AI, but FIreEye is not following suit."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Its documentation can be improved. The main problem that I see with FireEye is the documentation. We are an official distributor and partner of FireEye, and we have access to complete documentation about how to configure or implement this technology, but for customers, very limited documentation is available openly. This is the area in which FireEye should evolve. All documents should be easily available for everyone."
"Based on what we deployed, they should emphasize the application filtering and the web center. We need to look deeper into the SSM inspection. If we get the full solution with that module, we don't need to get the SSM database from another supplier."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"Technical packaging could be improved."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiSandbox is ranked 4th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 36 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 37 reviews. Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.2, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSandbox writes "Light and powerful solution design; useful to have". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one". Fortinet FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Check Point SandBlast Network, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Fortinet FortiEDR and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate, Vectra AI and NetWitness Platform. See our Fortinet FortiSandbox vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
