We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is #5 ranked solution in SOAR tools. PeerSpot users give McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator an average rating of 8 out of 10. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is most commonly compared to McAfee MVISION ePO: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs McAfee MVISION ePO. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 40% of all views.
What is McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator?
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator (McAfee ePO) is the most advanced, extensible, and scalable centralized security management software in the industry. Unifying security management through an open platform, McAfee ePO makes risk and compliance management simpler and more successful for organizations of all sizes.

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator was previously known as McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator.

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Buyer's Guide

Download the McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: January 2022

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Customers
Brelje & Race, Cognizant, Sutherland Global Services, Eagle Rock Energy, Arab National Bank, Bank Central Asia, Kleberg Bank, Leading Mexican Bank, SF Police Credit Union, Macquarie Telecom, Seagate Technology, Blackburn & Darwen Council, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, IRCEP, Major U.S. State Government, State of Alaska, State of Colorado, Cemex, Deutsche Edelstahlwerke
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Video

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Pricing Advice

What users are saying about McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator pricing:
  • "There is a license required to use this solution. If we use the additional components, such as DLP encryption, there is an additional cost. However, it is similar to a separate product altogether. If you want to use that or not, it is optional, but when you use it, it will cost you additional pricing."
  • "It is attractively priced. It is a fraction of what we're going to pay for CrowdStrike or SentinelOne, but it only has a fraction of the capabilities as well."
  • McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    cybersecurity specialist at a mining and metals company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Improves endpoint security well but takes a lot of resources to do so.
    Pros and Cons
    • "The feature that I have found most valuable is its general purpose of protecting our endpoints from infections, malicious files, and all those kinds of things. The fact that there are organized policies and policy inheritance. The general management."
    • "The impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes. Additionally, the difficulties we experience with inheriting and breaking inheritance on the organization's structure breakdown for policy inheritance and then for rules inheritance. We are actually struggling with this."

    How has it helped my organization?

    McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator improves our general endpoint security - wherever a user might be tricked into clicking on a link or downloading a file or bringing a file on an external medium or getting it from somewhere on the internet. After having detected that it could be malicious, it blocks it. That's the main reason we protect our endpoints.

    What is most valuable?

    McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is our general endpoint protection platform. The agent is deployed to all of our endpoints and according to the endpoint's purpose, e.g. industrial or office-like, it is configured properly and is managed centrally. That's quite all there is to explain about that.

    The feature that I have found most valuable is its general purpose of protecting our endpoints from infections, malicious files, and all those kinds of things. Also the fact that there are organized policies and policy inheritance. The general management, in fact, nothing particular.

    What needs improvement?

    In terms of what could be improved, I would say the impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes. Additionally, the difficulties we experience with inheriting and breaking inheritance on the organization's structure breakdown for policy inheritance and then for rules inheritance. We are actually struggling with this.

    As for what I would like to see in the next release, that is related to the disadvantages, the drawbacks as I would call it. Some tuning of the inheritances for policies and things, so that we can extend policies to a lower level in the organization or in the structure. Inherit and extend rather than break the inheritance and start again on a lower level, because then, when on a higher level, and something changes, it has to be replicated on a lower level, rather than being taken automatically into account which complicates the management. Additionally, some performance tuning on the endpoints to make sure the agent does not take too much resources or it could be further granularly customized. Something like it should not take more than X percent of memory or of CPU in office hours, business hours, and could take more outside of those hours. So some tweaks, improvements, and configuration options in these areas.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator for four or five years. It's still our current platform.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is quite stable. We're not having any issues with that.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is scalable. That's not an issue.

    All the endpoints are protected with the platform and the servers, as well. It is something like 8,000 endpoints and 500 servers, quite a lot. In our Belgium branch of the company we're actually talking about almost everyone, we're like 5,000 employees, so that's only for Belgium. But there are more endpoints than the number of employees, of course.

    There are the general workstations. Some users have more than one endpoint assigned to them, or a business or team's endpoints that are used in common within the team. That explains the larger number of endpoints compared to the number of employees we have in Belgium. There are different levels of the management who use this.

    We have one guy in our team, in our Belgium site, that is almost fully dedicated to managing the antivirus product on the endpoint level, the workstation level. And then another person who is partially occupied, one third or half of his time for the server component. But as I told you, the endpoint workstations are being managed on a higher corporate level. There is also at least one person who concentrates some of his time on the management level. So, in total, for Belgium, let's say, two FTs.

    I don't think we have any plans to increase because in fact, all our endpoints are covered. It grows and shrinks with the number of endpoints we have. The percentage stays the same.

    How are customer service and support?

    That's a question I can't answer because I haven't had to deal with them, personally. In general, when we're having issues, we turn to the higher corporate level, the Europe level, to know what their approach to the problem we might experience is. I've not noticed us having to deal directly with McAfee's technical support.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was long before I arrived. Sorry, I couldn't tell you more.

    The deployment is strongly dependent on our environment's size, the number of workstations to deploy on and to deploy new versions on. But in general to get to 90% coverage when we have to deploy a new version, it takes at least a month. That's mainly due to the number of endpoints and then to manage and to control them, to make sure they're communicating correctly, that they're powered on, and that they're on the network.

    What other advice do I have?

    McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is a well-known product. It is a big one. It is quite easy to compare on those different criteria. It's not a new kid on the block, it's a known value, it's been there for a long time. In my point of view, it's worth comparing it to other products to see if it integrates with something you already have, because now there is a tendency to have more ecosystems of endpoint protection and server protection.

    The Microsoft ecosystem, or parts of the Microsoft ecosystem, are already in place in the organization. There will be eventual integration with a corporate data center or pyramid in firewalling. Whether they are already in place or not, it is important to consider these elements and to make a decision after these considerations. Not that I would advise particularly for or against McAfee, but there are a lot of elements to take into account.

    I think it serves its purpose, that's fair and square. But there are always things that could be optimized. Whether it's the performance impact on the endpoint, or the management, in general. No solution will ever fit 100% to an environment, whether it's your own or another, it will not always fit 100%. There will always be little drawbacks, little things that could be optimized. Then it's a question of how to handle it.

    You have to live with some minor inconveniences. There are advantages, there are the things that are good. In general, it's a good product. I would not advise against it.

    On a scale of one to ten, I would give McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator a seven because of the reasons I told you. It does the job. It's quite solid. It's stable, of course. It's not something new, something experimental, it's proven itself already. And yeah, why not higher? Because of the things I told you already.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    SambhajiBhosale
    Network Security Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Consultant
    Scalable, good support, and simple endpoint installation
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most valuable features of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator are the easy-to-use console, and lots of reports, such as customized reports and inventory reports. Additionally, overall the centralized management is very good where you can see the compliance levels and inventory."
    • "The solution could improve the EDR component in many areas, such as the zero-day and persistent threats. The implementation is also complex for this feature."

    What is our primary use case?

    McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is used to manage endpoints, networks, compliance, and data security.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable features of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator are the easy-to-use console, and lots of reports, such as customized reports and inventory reports. Additionally, overall the centralized management is very good where you can see the compliance levels and inventory.

    What needs improvement?

    The solution could improve the EDR component in many areas, such as the zero-day and persistent threats. The implementation is also complex for this feature.

    There are different policies in the solution, such as EPO for EDR, and for Sandboxing, but when it comes to the EPO it is only for the policy orchestration and not for the analysis, incident management, or for the team who is working on the cyber security. They need to know how to use a different console, which is integrated nicely in their cloud platform called Envision but they have not done it in the EPO. 

    I don't know what the McAfee strategy is, why they have not integrated the EDR analysis piece into the EPO. It is already available in the Envision, but not in the EPO. This is a difficulty. Whenever there needs to be any analysis, correlation, and in-depth EDR functionality it is not part of the EDR. There is a separate console for it. We need to depend on the inventory and the policy, and the EPO, but when it comes to analysis and in-depth alert details, then we need to dive into another console.

    There are times when it is good to have one console to allow people to receive the trained analysis and historical data related to that particular incident.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator for approximately 10 years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    A lot of the components of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, such as Sandboxing, DX, and  ATP are not stable. However, the antivirus is stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The scalability of the McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is good.

    We have more than 75,000 users using this solution. We are using a combination of McAfee and FireEye where the antivirus part is provided by McAfee and the EDR part is covered by FireEye. Our next target is to combine both of these elements, either FireEye or McAfee.

    How are customer service and support?

    The technical support of McAfee is great.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I have used other solutions, such as FireEye and Cisco solutions.

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment of the McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is very easy on the endpoints. However, deploying the solution in a large enterprise is very difficult. In terms of all the components of McAfee, it is difficult. There are lots of false positives and manual effort required for deploying the advanced component section.

    What about the implementation team?

    McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator requires lots of maintenance and we have had many performance issues. We have done maintenance for our databases approximately three times and it is a difficult job. The maintenance is time-consuming and it's a very difficult job to do.

    When the database that we are managing is almost 70 - 80,000 systems, it is quite difficult to have an EPO, wherein everything is central, such as policy, database, asset, and inventory. There is a lot of load on the central server. For a long time, McAfee has been using central management where there are no distributed components. Everything is getting loaded on EPO and it is creating lots of maintenance work.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    There is a license required to use this solution. If we use the additional components, such as DLP encryption, there is an additional cost. However, it is similar to a separate product altogether. If you want to use that or not, it is optional, but when you use it, it will cost you additional pricing.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    My team worked on FireEye and Cisco solutions. When comparing McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator to both these solutions, there are pros and cons for each. Some features are positive and really good in McAfee in terms of the UI, and easy-to-use Console. However, when compared to advanced features, such as EDR, FireEye and Cisco are better compared to McAfee.

    The antivirus measurement, compliance, and deploying the agents, are much easier in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator compared to FireEye and Cisco.

    What other advice do I have?

    My advice to those wanting to implement McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is to keep it distributed. Whatever components you can distribute in terms of connectors need to be put in different locations. It will be taken care of properly. Otherwise, there will be lots of noncompliance issues and lots of loads on the network because it is bandwidth-intensive.

    If we have a larger user database for the organization, then keep it local. To allow a minimum load on the EPO. We should do the maintenance of the EPO quarterly in terms of the database maintenance or in terms of the laws, policies. It should be reviewed periodically with the help of your support to make sure that your policies will not go wrong or your database will not create any errors. If there are errors there will be a problem to recover the data. If we don't do the maintenance, then there are quite chances of crashing the database

    I rate McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Learn what your peers think about McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2022.
    564,997 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Security Analyst at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Great graphical interface, good log events, and a simple setup
    Pros and Cons
    • "The graphical interface of the solution is its most valuable aspect."
    • "The solution sometimes has some false positives on IP addresses, from the web control aspect of the product. This needs to be improved."

    What is our primary use case?

    We have a lot of endpoints and the major use case for us is to secure the endpoints. That includes computers, servers, etc.

    What is most valuable?

    Easy deployment of agents from console and management of endpoints. The graphical interface of the solution. They have a good log event system. If you're able to trace it in the log, all you need to do is to whitelist the IP when you see a false positive.

    What needs improvement?

    The solution sometimes has some false positives on connections from the web control aspect of the product. This needs to be improved.

    When you have false positive on the firewall, it rarely blocks off some legitimate connections to our network. 

    The reporting could be better. 

    Search or filter on Knowledge base gives broad choices instead of almost specific to your search. 

    agent communication between client and server but products are not deployed.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for more than two years at this point. It hasn't been too long.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is extremely stable. We haven't had any issues whatsoever. It's reliable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The only real issue we have is that there are often false positives, however, it's easy to fix in the logs.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is very scalable. You just need to add more licenses. That's it.

    As it's an antivirus for our endpoints, everybody in our company technically uses the solution. Everyone is affected by it.

    We plan to use the solution in the future. I'm unsure as to if we'll expand our usage or not.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support is okay. We get support from a McAfee partner here in Nigeria who liaises with the OEM too. We've been satisfied with the level of service provided.

    McAfee has a portal for customers or partners to use, for product packages, updates, knowledge base, tools, technical support

    How was the initial setup?

    The solution's implementation is pretty easy to install. It's very straightforward once you have your database. It's not complex.

    When I joined the company, it was in migration. I wasn't there from the start, so I can't say how long it took. However, I was around when they did the migration and that took less than a month.

    What about the implementation team?

    Through vendor team. McAfee partner consultant and they have their own local support team. They are resellers and partners in Nigeria. We were quite satisfied with their professionalism and knowledge.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Choose your anniversary cycle e.g. pay annually.

    You just pay for what you want your license to cover. It is modular. It depends on the feature you want. There's the firewall, DLP, drive encryption, web control, threat prevention, antispam, etc. Scope your requirement and choose to fore what covers your requirement or budget. It depends on what you want to use it for. It's got amazing flexibility.

    What other advice do I have?

    As an end user, I'd recommend the solution. McAfee ePO has many more features and covers more. A company looking for a new solution really needs to do some initial research to ensure their requirements are met.

    I'd rate the solution eight out of ten overall.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Sanjit Achary
    Senior Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Stable with good central management and good technical support
    Pros and Cons
    • "The central management console is the solution's most valuable aspect."
    • "There needs to be support for Mac computers. Currently, McAfee does not work on iOS."

    What is our primary use case?

    The solution handles risk and compliance aspects for our company. It handles everything including uploading documents, etc.

    What is most valuable?

    I don't use the solution in a technical way, so the technical aspects of the solution I'm not clear on.

    The central management console is the solution's most valuable aspect.

    What needs improvement?

    The solution needs to be more clear about the licensing. They should have a way for users to educate themselves on the costs so that companies can figure out how to reduce costs.

    There needs to be support for Mac computers. Currently, McAfee does not work on iOS.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been working with the solution for the last five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution has been quite stable for us. We haven't had any issues at all.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have about 2500 people using the solution in our organization. They're a mix of people, including engineers and architects. We use it quite extensively - on a regular basis.

    The solution is scalable, but the issue for us is that the pricing can be quite high.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We've been in touch with technical support in the past. They've been quite good. We've been satisfied with their level of service.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    In the past, we've worked with Symantec, ForcePoint, and Barracuda. McAfee has some features that aren't part of other competitor's feature sets. Overall, however, from a technical point of view, they are all mostly the same.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is quite simple. We didn't find it complex at all.

    I was not there during the original implementation. I'm very new to this organization. I had just joined the team a few months ago. This solution has been running for the last five years, so I don't have more historical data in relation to the original setup.

    We have two software engineers overseeing the project.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Comparatively, the pricing is quite low.

    What other advice do I have?

    We're a McAfee customer. We don't have a specific relationship with the organization. We are using the latest version of the solution.

    The solution is quite good and stable right now, but there are a lot of other products coming to the market. I'm currently investigating what other features customers need or are using to see if we can develop these out on this solution or not. 

    Many organizations will find the solution has may features that would suit their needs and reduce the number of issues they face. However, it does depend on the individual company and what their unique requirements are.

    I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Chief Information Security Officer at a venture capital & private equity firm with 201-500 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Attractively priced and easy to manage, but seems a little outdated in being 100% signature-based without all of the insights and protections
    Pros and Cons
    • "The general endpoint protection is valuable, and it is easy to manage."
    • "There should be more insights and completeness into the cyber kill chain, similar to CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. It just seems a little outdated in being 100% signature-based without all of the insights and protections that come with CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. Overall, they've got some catching up to do if they plan to compete in the comprehensive EDR space."

    What is our primary use case?

    We're pretty much using it as a traditional AV.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It has brought what it is built for. It has brought traditional AV capabilities and signature-based scanning.

    What is most valuable?

    The general endpoint protection is valuable, and it is easy to manage.

    What needs improvement?

    There should be more insights and completeness into the cyber kill chain, similar to CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. It just seems a little outdated in being 100% signature-based without all of the insights and protections that come with CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. Overall, they've got some catching up to do if they plan to compete in the comprehensive EDR space.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this solution for five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is stable. There are no concerns there. It didn't consume a lot of resources and things like that. We didn't see issues from that perspective.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is fairly easy to add new devices. It is controlled within our environment. 

    All employees and all servers are using it. It is being used extensively, but we don't plan to increase its usage because we're looking to get a replacement for this solution.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Their technical support is average.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    It wasn't McAfee ePO. It was the even lesser AV five years ago. It has been McAfee ever since from my AV protection standpoint.

    How was the initial setup?

    Its initial setup was straightforward. It took a couple of days. It has been pretty easy to add new machines ever since.

    What about the implementation team?

    It was an in-house job. In terms of maintenance, it requires minimal maintenance. We have our security services provider to take care of maintenance.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    It is attractively priced. It is a fraction of what we're going to pay for CrowdStrike or SentinelOne, but it only has a fraction of the capabilities as well.

    What other advice do I have?

    It is great if you're looking for a traditional signature-based AV product, but if you're looking for a more comprehensive EDR solution, then CrowdStrike and SentinelOne are clearly the top two within that space.

    Overall, I would rate it a seven out of 10. If I'm rating it for a traditional AV product, I'd give it a nine or 10 because it totally solves that use case, but if I'm rating it against a comprehensive EDR solution, which includes traditional AV and next-gen behavioral capability, then it would be a five, but they're not necessarily apples to apples.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    ITCS user
    Cyber Security Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 10
    Good security with a user friendly console; a multiple use plug-in would be beneficial
    Pros and Cons
    • "The security is a key feature and the console is very user friendly."
    • "Lacks a single plug-in for multiple uses."

    What is our primary use case?

    I use the solution for two things - as an antivirus for a spider scan enterprise and endpoint protection, and also to make application whitelisting, or application blocking, where we only allow certain applications to run on the server, in case the server has been compromised. That could mean our ePO scripts or anything might be compromised and it can't run. We install a plug-in so it won't run any executables which are not whitelisted. We're a cyber security company and a customer of McAfee. 

    What is most valuable?

    The security is a key feature and the console is very user friendly. I like that there are multiple options for reporting. It's a helpful tool. 

    What needs improvement?

    The product could have a single plug-in that would have multiple uses rather than a single plug-in which is used for a single purpose. Each aspect has a separate plug-in. They should concentrate on providing something for all of the options that are available.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using this solution for about three years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability of the product is pretty good. Our entire company uses it and it's deployed throughout. We have five people maintaining it. It runs in the backend and there are around 1,500 to 2,000 people who benefit from it. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is pretty poor. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is quite straightforward. You just need to set up an SEO database in the backend and couple the SEO database in the ePO management console. It's quite simple. 

    What other advice do I have?

    All the endpoint security solutions operate in a similar manner. If you take it as a baseline and if you want to get acquainted with a security solution then I think this is definitely a good tool. Of course, the costing and other factors need to be taken into consideration. 

    I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Shreyansh Sharma
    Instrument and Control Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Reasonably priced and scalable but the stability is a concern
    Pros and Cons
    • "Technical support is very helpful."
    • "Sometimes agents hang. We have to reinstall the agents."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use the solution in order to distribute the security features to all the nodes.

    What is most valuable?

    The user interface is great.

    Technical support is very helpful.

    It's great how the solution distributes the policy. For example, application control, distribution management, et cetera. The functionality is fine. I don't have any issues. 

    The integration capabilities are good.

    The solution can scale well.

    The pricing of the product is reasonable. 

    What needs improvement?

    Sometimes agents hang. We have to reinstall the agents. On top of that, we have too many advisories for ePO. There are stability issues. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using the solution for three to four years at this point. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We've had issues with stability. I would like the product to be more stable. 

    Occasionally, we get bugs and we have to deal with them, and it's not ideal.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The product can scale if a company needs it to.

    I do plan to scale and would like to use it for more of the system nodes.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We have found the technical support to be very helpful. They are responsive and available when we need them to help us troubleshoot. We are satisfied with their level of service. We haven't had any issues with them.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We pay a licensing fee on a yearly basis. The pricing itself is fine. I don't consider it to be overly expensive. 

    What other advice do I have?

    I'm just a customer and an end-user. I don't have a business relationship with McAfee.

    I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Senior Consultant at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    An easy-to-use dashboard with good centralized management
    Pros and Cons
    • "From a single dashboard, I can take a look at several things including the endpoint protection, the file integrity section, the data activity monitor, and more."
    • "There is a problem when it comes to agent communication and duplicate records, where the rebooting of a machine leads to the installation of a new agent and you get a lot of duplicate records that ultimately affect your compliance monitoring."

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is the centralized management. From a single dashboard, I can take a look at several things including the endpoint protection, the file integrity section, the data activity monitor, and more.

    The dashboard is simple to use.

    What needs improvement?

    There is a problem when it comes to agent communication and duplicate records, where the rebooting of a machine leads to the installation of a new agent and you get a lot of duplicate records that ultimately affect your compliance monitoring.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator for about three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    With respect to stability, I would like to see improvements made in terms of agent communication and compliance.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I have not had the need to scale this product.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We had a local technical support company and did not deal with McAfee at the regional level. I can say that our local support was quite decent.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.