We performed a comparison between Trellix Active Response and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)."Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
"The solution is scalable."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"The technical support services are good."
"It has a feature called Isolation. If a device is compromised, we can connect it to our SOC, and no one would be able to access it. This way we can limit the damage to the network while we are investigating."
"The threat scanning is excellent. It uses predictive technology and I can utilize attack data to help us fine-tune our systems and network infrastructure. This protects us against current and future attacks."
"Provides protection against threats."
"The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features."
"I found the initial setup to be easy."
"The platform’s most valuable features are ease of use, integration, and deployment."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"Detections could be improved."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"The solution needs to work on memory consumption. It is too high."
"In some cases, the detection part was not accurate enough. We opened a few cases for the vendor to help us with some miscategorized findings on the endpoints. There were some false positive detections, and we had to work with the vendor to get them tested. We even had some incidents that were not detected. It was a black box type of solution for us."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"The integration and display of the dashboards have to be done better."
"So far, McAfee MVISION Endpoint ticks off all of our boxes, but its pricing could always be better."
"They could also increase or improve the scalability because to my knowledge the biggest bandwidth can only support up to 10 gigs of input."
"They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Active Response is ranked 56th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 48 reviews. Trellix Active Response is rated 6.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Trellix Active Response writes "Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "It integrates well with other solutions, but the vendor needs more of a local presence and faster response". Trellix Active Response is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR), 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 Digital Guardian.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
