We performed a comparison between CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The feature called PTA, which stands for Privileged Threat Analytics keeps track of what admins are doing and works with Centimeters. If something fishy is going on with a user's credentials, it alerts the security team so they can act fast. Plus, it automates stuff like resetting credentials or blocking users. So, if there's a potential hack, CyberArk can change passwords and lock out users in a snap. It also gives you a heads-up if anything unusual is going on with server activities, like someone creating new users with uncontrolled credentials."
"The solution is scalable."
"The password rotation and the session recording are the most valuable features."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature is that it does lifecycle management and that it will change to whatever the end target is."
"The solution allows me to give access and privileges to each user individually"
"It has drastically reduced the attack surface for local administrative rights and the chance of escalation of privilege. We've removed, at this point, close to 98 percent of the local administrative accounts on workstations. If there were an incident, it would stop at that point and we'd be able to know."
"What sets CyberArk apart is its continuous innovation, staying ahead of the competition."
"Trellix Endpoint Security has a full suite of DLP."
"It's good that it periodically scans all my drives. I can stay up to date with the status of my drivers and update them if needed."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"The stability has been great."
"The extendability is great."
"It's very stable and reliable."
"The response part of EDR was most valuable. We used that to separate the endpoint from the network. We utilized the solution during the instant response. We were also utilizing advanced malware detection capabilities, but we benefited the most from its help with the response."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"They need much better integration with Azure AD."
"The tool should be more user-friendly."
"Performance could be better. We have a couple of problems with CyberArk right now. One of the problems is performance in our environment. Support also takes a long time to respond. If the user already has local admin rights, then I can't collect any events in the console from this device. There are also some options in CyberArk that are not working properly, and are not helpful in this case. I can't collect any information to create a proper policy for the device. I have to investigate everything manually, or even disable the local admin from the device. I can collect the events only after this, and it's very time consuming. In my case, it's a waste of resources."
"The product needs a streamlined user interface; improvements to the user interface can enhance user experience and make the solution more intuitive to navigate."
"Compared to other tools like Linux, this solution isn't as user-friendly."
"The installation process is pretty difficult."
"It's an old product and has many areas that can be improved."
"We have had some major issues with the tool, but we have worked with the R&D teams and we have worked with support. There is room for improvement, especially on response times. But they're working on it and they're doing the best they can."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing. The price should be improved, it's high."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"There should be better integration between the ePolicy Orchestrator and FireEye console. The integration of both consoles should be better."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"The product’s on-premise version is costly in terms of extra charges for SQL database and Windows server licenses."
"One suggestion is they should reduce the constant notifications. Whenever I open my laptop, there are too many notifications from McAfee, and it gets annoying."
More CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is ranked 6th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 27 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 48 reviews. CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager writes "Offers integrated solutions and expands its capabilities through strategic acquisitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, CrowdStrike Falcon, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Tanium, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Open EDR. See our CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) 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.
