Trellix Advanced Threat Defense Reviews

We are working with Palo Alto products, specifically firewalls. We are only using Palo Alto Firewalls and not Cortex. With FireEye and Trellix, we only work with ETP now because the NDR function which was due to an Enix Trellix appliance is now integrated with the WildFire product of Palo Alto. We are working with Trellix Advanced Threat Defense.

The fact that in 10 years, we have had no problem is the most valuable feature for us; it's really a washing machine, but the only problem we face is that it's difficult to report on this product.

For us, the behavioral analysis feature is a little bit transparent. The really good point of the product is that there is a retro-inspection when you receive an email on Monday or Tuesday that becomes maliciously charged on Friday or Saturday.

I would like to see an API interface for internal email and control of outgoing email to make it closer to 10. It's necessary; today we have an MX interface, and it would be interesting to have an API interface to manage internal email and an external control of outgoing email.

We have been working with Trellix Advanced Threat Defense for ten years.

We are working with Palo Alto now instead of Check Point products.

We have not taken part in the implementation. In fact, the product is very pleasant for end users because it's very well automated, and you have really nothing to do.

The fact that in 10 years, we have had no problem is the most valuable feature for us. It's really a washing machine, but the only problem we face is that it's difficult to report on this product.

Prisma is a commercial name of the firewall now, but we don't work with the cloud product. Only our company is using it and we do not recommend it to customers.

For us, it's transparent because it's a cloud product, so we don't really know the version as it's always updated.

We have not had any problem, but it's difficult to report on what's going on because some days they can wash out perhaps 100 mails, and then it's difficult to say how many attacks you have reached. The right email has been washed out and then nobody has complained.

We do not use the Threat Visualization feature; as we are in MX, the mail is washed out before it is in the mail inbox of the user, thus avoiding any problem requiring a reservation.

In fact, there is no integration with existing security frameworks. The only problem we can have is that as we have no API interface, there is no inspection of internal mail.

I rate Trellix Advanced Threat Defense a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for threat protection. It was for a government project. It involves using a VPN and firewall. 

It's easy to use. The interface is very good. 

It was easy to set up initially.

The sandboxing is good.

It offers a very useful Excel protocol that isn't available elsewhere.

It is stable and reliable.

We've found the integration with different operating systems to be quite good. It works well with different types of extensions as well, including Adobe and Microsoft Office. 

The solution is capable of scaling. 

I consider the pricing to be pretty good.

The scalability could be better. 

We'd like them to be better at dealing with script threats.

In sandboxing, the time to respond is slower than we would like. We'd like them to be able to process faster. For example, Fortinet, they are doing 18,000 files per hour. For Wildfire, it is elastic. It can support as many files as you get. McAfee doesn't react like that.

It does not support interfaces with HTTPS.

We've used the latest version of the solution for one month. 

The solution has been stable. It's reliable and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I'd rate the stability four out of five in terms of reliability.

It's moderately scalable. I'd rate it three out of five in terms of its ability to expand. 

I don't deal directly with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

The client chose McAfee as they are using the Excel protocol and the Excel protocol exists only in McAfee.

I've also used Palo Alto Wildfire as well. 

The initial setup was very simple and straightforward. It was not overly complex or difficult. 

There is another team that manages the solution and handles the deployment, and therefore I was not directly involved in the implementation the whole way through. 

We have an internal team that can handle the initial setup.

The product offers good pricing. It was not very expensive. 

I've looked at Wildfire, McAfee, CheckPoint, and Fortinet.

We have a partnership with McAfee.

We were using an older version of McAfee and I suggested the client use a new version. It is not my own product. It is for a customer. We are now on the latest version. We've migrated to the cloud. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the solution for client management and security. We used the whole suite for client Firewall, antivirus, and everything provided by Trellix.

The most valuable part of this solution was the e-policy Orchestration trader because there is no comparable solution from Microsoft or elsewhere.

The most effective feature for threat detection and threat hunting is ATP. Trellix’s UI is excellent, too.

There could be a tool that automatically updates all-new Microsoft IPs, which are available for free to connect to the client.

I have been using Trellix Advanced Threat Defense for twenty years.

The product is stable.

The solution is scalable. 8,000 people deployed across multiple locations with varying insights from 300 hundred to 4000 people.

We have technical support from Trellix teams, who also helped us build the Trellix system. We had a second team that supported our customers remotely.

The initial setup is easy.

We've made a lot of improvements with Trellix. We started a long time ago, and we enjoyed all these improvements. Now, we are switching to Microsoft solutions because of market demand and customers.

There was a separate team responsible for the maintenance of the solution.

I recommend this solution because of its ease of use.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

This solution is our go-to for your basic antivirus scans. Most of the stuff that we have is standalone. It's all pooled from McAfee, we buy the license for whatever tool the customer wants use to use, and we install it on the product. I'm a manager at the company. 

This solution is very easy to use and requires little to no training. It has good exfiltration, and is an all-in-one product. 

Some of our customers have mentioned the lack of a tool that would allow for remote capabilities without being attached to the internet. They've been looking at opportunities to set up their own networks and they'd like to use McAfee and other cyber tools strictly through that and not rely on the internet to run them.

I haven't had any issues with stability.

The solution is scalable although we don't use it to its full potential. 

This is a tool that's well known and a tool that most people know how to use. It's easily installed and procured. I've never had any issues but we're a company that has a limitation on the amount of different tools we can use. There may be something better out there, but I haven't seen that yet.

I rate this product an eight out of 10. 

Primary use case: malware blockage. If you remember WannaCry, this system stopped it dead in its tracks with zero system failures. If you recall WannaCry hit on the weekend. I updated the rules from home on my ePO server and more than 200 machines were on during the weekend. When I checked the logs on Monday morning, at least 50,000 hits were registered in the logs with zero system failures. Its greatest strength is the DXL client which can rapidly disseminate attack information to all clients via the McAfee Agent instead of going through the ePO server.

Even though I did not have the ATD device, it still is a pretty solid defense. As of 2020, they have integrated the DXL client into the ePO Agent, hence it has simplified the number of products to be installed on the system. It is not a lightweight system, but it is ironclad.

The entire system is valuable by having multiple components superbly united to function as a malware defender. If a system admin can put in the patience to read and constantly update the ePO system in terms of rules, enforcing them at regular intervals, you can safely go to sleep every night.

Make the ATD appliance a part of the whole product offering and take the whole thing onto the cloud. While it is there already, it is not to the same level as the on-premise version.

McAfee sells the ATD APPLIANCE AS A SEPARATE PRODUCT above the rest of the threat defence mechanism stated above. Im not sure of exact cloud readiness status of the ATD device ( making the device available on the cloud as part of the licensed products ). Request to check with McAfee account manager in your country/region

I used it in my earlier organisation and deployed the full system, except for the ATD appliance. This was last April and the system has seen some more feature upgrades and enhancements. 

Quite impressive 

Very scalable for the versions available

Top notch . Im in Inda and we have the tech support centre running out of Bangalore 

No

Excellent support from McAfee 

In house - I did I myself

100% worth the money thrown at it

Costing is competitive now that Symantec has almost stepped out of this arena the completion has changed with other players coming up. 

No

no

Our primary use for this solution is the detection of threats.

This solution allows for visibility of events in our network.

The most valuable features are the administration console and its detection and response module.

I would like to see future versions of the solution incorporate artificial intelligence technology.

Our primary use case for this solution is endpoint security.

This solution has helped us to deal with malware. It does endpoint security very well and can explode malware into protected spaces so that it doesn't actually hurt the endpoint of the organization.

The most valuable feature for us, today, is that it works very well.

This solution needs to be made "cloud ready". As the industry is pushing everybody towards the cloud, there are these fat clients, like McAfee, that are not lightweight and cannot handle the cloud infrastructure yet.

The stability of this solution is very good.

With respect to scalability, it works until you start talking about cloud environments.

I would rate technical support very well.

I did use a different solution prior to this one, and I switched because of the dynamics in the industry. They had not caught up.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We handled the deployment of this solution internally.

I see ROI. It stops in excess of twenty-five malware events per month, all of which could be critical to the business.

Our licensing fees for this solution are approximately one million dollars per year.

This product does the job, but it is not flexible enough to do new environments yet. They're behind the eight ball.

If another company is considering this solution then I would recommend it if they're not going cloud. If they are, look somewhere else.

I would rate this solution seven out of ten.

The primary use case is for networking.

The most valuable feature is networking.

I would like to have a simplified deployment. So, it would not need to reconfigure a bunch of other things to get the product integrated.

The Cisco networking products could be improved upon.

The stability is above average in the industry. For reliability, I would rate them as an eight or nine out of ten.

It is very scalable.

The support on their side is not readily available. It takes a while. The customer service responsiveness is not there with smaller companies.

They are generally reliable versus other vendors who we have gone with in the past. However, when something does happen, they are very slow to respond. Now, it is less frequent than it was previously.

The initial setup was industry standard complex. It takes awhile and has a lot of planning involved. It could be simplified with product redesign.

We did it in-house.

The product is expensive, but it is better than the rest of them in the industry.

The version that I am working with is a pain in the butt.

Our primary use case is for protection of server and desktop workstations.  

The features I find most valuable are: the management, the ability for automatic remediation of threats and it can successfully detect a threat, and to act upon it.

I think maybe a simpler interface might help. And a better integration with the active directory and to integrate with directory services.

It is stable. I do not have any system items that I need to take care of. 

Technical support was helpful for what I needed.  

It was not complex, but there are things to look out for, because it's an intense product. It scans intensely. And there are major obstacles to overcome if it scans while users are using a network, then it is not a good thing. And they should emphasize it more. It would be nice if they could try to have it a little more lightweight. For, it is interfering.

This wasn't my first choice, but I ended up choosing it. I have previous experience with Symantec Advanced Threat Protection.