Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Reviews

I use the solution in my company for malware detection. My customers are mostly banking and government organizations.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its area for threat detection.

When it comes to some unknown fileless attacks, the tool is not able to detect them properly, making it an area where improvements are required.

The tool's support needs to improve in the areas of response it provides to users.

I have been using Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) for two and a half years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I rate the technical support a seven and a half out of ten.

The solution is SaaS-based, and we have deployed it using the hybrid cloud model.

The tool's deployment phase is a lengthy process. For one endpoint, it takes 15 to 20 minutes.

The tool is cost-effective. Many agents need to be installed, and on-premises integration is required.

I haven't worked on the tool to see how it works for security workflow.

My customers have not seen any challenges while working with Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) in terms of integrations.

The tool does not support any AI and security initiatives.

The tool is suitable for enterprise companies.

If businesses are completely on the cloud, then the tool is not required. If a company has a hybrid cloud model with an on-premises model, then it will be a good tool to use.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to detect and identify critical management activities. Within the network level, you can understand what is happening in the environment. Organizations using complex systems for various purposes can easily identify shared activity within the environment. There is a detection base that allows us to identify and manage threat events. The solution also includes licenses for forensic investigations of any attack that occurs. Details can be found within the platform's release at the end of the month or whenever needed. Any Trellix malware activity will be displayed on the dashboard, and the moderating services will be integrated into everything we have built.

The dashboard makes it easier and more effective to analyze data. It also allows us to access the AWS analytics and system features in one place. If we need to find specific details about an endpoint, we can determine what is happening and how any organization is affected by the data provided.

The better approach is to apply the necessary improvements to make the dashboard more effective and user-friendly. If simplified, users can investigate issues in more detail by clicking on the relevant sections. Making it simpler would enhance understanding and improve the investigation process. Customers currently using the system can view everything on a single dashboard, which is very effective for understanding all scenarios and activities.

Customers rely on a single platform When they notice an incident, response, or attack. In SOC analysis teams, especially in banks or traditional organizations, the entire team needs access to the scenario on one platform. This allows them to understand the dashboard and detect any ongoing activity easily. Once they identify an issue, they can proceed with further analysis. Customers need a clear and visible platform that helps them understand when and how their site is being compromised.

The dashboard is split across different platforms. For example, if you want information on Incident Detection, you have to access one dashboard, and for DLP reporting, there's a separate platform. This fragmentation means you can't access everything from a single dashboard. Instead, you must navigate various options to find the right dashboard. This setup results in a separate view for each function. Ideally, we'd like to consolidate this into a unified platform, making it easier to identify site behaviors from one centralized dashboard.

I have been using Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) as a reseller.

We initially used McAfee's VSP and Varia System Enterprise products. After transitioning to Endpoint Security, particularly in version 10 or 7, we encountered performance issues on systems running Windows 7. The high resource utilization caused significant slowdowns, leading to numerous complaints, especially from Sakasho. The EDR was consuming too many system resources, which impacted overall performance. However, with the newer versions, like those in the InVision EPO, these issues seem to have been resolved, and the system now operates more efficiently. The current product is expected to be much lighter and more stable.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

I highly appreciate service architecture. They are developing day by day.

We are an enterprise that provides solutions through Trellix EDR that various external customers use. Our solutions are deployed in a large and diverse environment, including companies, telecoms, and major banks. These organizations rely on our products for their protection needs.

There are multiple ways to get support. You can create a case through your partner or support portal by calling. If necessary, you can raise a call and follow up immediately.

Positive

We operate within our environment and country. One of our clients, is interested in using our on-premises solution. They are hesitant to adopt a cloud-based solution due to concerns about data security. They worry that storing data in the cloud could expose it to unauthorized access. They are confused about how the cloud handles sensitive data like CPU data and prefer to keep their information on-premises. However, other banks have embraced cloud solutions and understand their value. Over time, as more companies study and become comfortable with cloud technology, we believe others will also follow and move to the cloud. We hope to maintain their interest in our services.

Its machine learning capability is strong, and the AI configurations and system integration enhance its effectiveness. The API solutions added to this system allow us to detect and respond to incidents quickly. The quick response is also due to Edge Solutions and specific-type solutions, enabling us to conduct thorough investigations and generate reports on the platform. 

I recommend Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) because it offers strong capabilities. It’s worth noting that XDR solutions are also available and might be more effective. These XDR solutions are advanced technologies with enhanced features, including improved API integration.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

As a user, I didn't have any concerns about technical aspects where I was working previously. Working together. So, we sell licenses of McAfee. We had a promotional activity in which when you buy a cell phone, you get a McAfee subscription for mobile, and we used to offer a license of McAfee with an internet connection.

Blocking browser navigation is a feature of the solution with which we have experienced success.

The fact that it is easy to manage by consumers, families, small businesses, or parents while blocking traffic is a valuable feature of the solution.

For Spanish users, it is necessary to have a knowledge base specifically designed for them, which is currently not available.

Blocking other browsers should be a feature introduced in the solution. At this time, you can control Safari and Microsoft Edge. But I don't know about the other browsers.

I have been using McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response for five years. We use the solution on mobile and in the cloud. Also, my company is a reseller.

There are issues with the solution on the other browsers. So, I don't know if any feature is enabled in the solution to resolve the issues.

We have been providing a lot of licenses, and we never had a problem. So, it is a scalable product. For personal use in my family, I may have plans to use it.

I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

The solution's initial setup process was simple.

There has been a return on investment since it is a good business. Hence, we embedded the solution in our services. So, I know that this is a good investment.

My company does provide the solution at a good price for our customers. The solution needs to support their Spanish customers. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response for our endpoints, and we are currently trying out the solid core. The tool scans even memory sticks and shows you what's going on with your network.

What we're using the most and what we found valuable in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response are Web Control, Advanced Threat Protection, and Threat Prevention features.

The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually.

Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months.

The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans.

McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules.

I've been using McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response since 2020.

I've contacted the technical support for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response many times. It takes time for the team to respond to the cases, but at the end of the day, you do get a response.

The initial setup for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response was easy. It wasn't complex. What took long in terms of setup was linking the tool to the on-premises ePO and configuring the DXL which was a challenge. McAfee was involved, but it still took time to configure.

I've seen ROI from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response.

McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is reasonable in terms of cost. It's a tool my company has been using for a few years now. It costs $25,000 to $30,000 for six hundred users.

We evaluated CrowdStrike aside from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response. Though it's a good product, we couldn't afford CrowdStrike.

I'm a user of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response. I work for a bank.

McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is deployed both on-premises and on the cloud in my company.

My company has six hundred endpoints on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response. The tool is installed on six hundred machines or devices. Two administrators take care of maintaining the tool.

My advice to people who want to implement McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is that it's a good product, but it has its limitations.

My rating for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is seven out of ten.

It has been helpful in terms of identifying unknown threats. The file is available on the endpoint, and the information is retrieved to identify any unknown or malicious file and then converted to a known file.

The endpoints and utilization are too high, which impacts the production activity. 

There are no additional features I would add. The McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response already has multiple features required for an IT solution.

We have been using this solution for two years, and it is deployed on-premises.

From a solution point of view, it is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution and very easy to use in terms of hardware or sizing.

In terms of the number of users, because we are a banking environment, the IT department, bankers and people on the business side use this solution. Therefore, a minimum of five people is required to manage the environment. We currently use it to its full extent but plan to replace it.

The technical support is very good, and we have never had problems with them.

Neutral

We used a different solution for more than 15 years before we migrated to McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response.

The initial setup was very straightforward. I rate the initial setup experience an eight out of ten. We used a third-party tool, and the deployment took a couple of months. 

Regarding ROI, I do not have precise numbers, but I rate it a four out of ten. 

We have a perpetual license that is renewed annually. I do not know the specific price in terms of costs, but I rate the cost a six out of ten. We also get the whole package for this solution in a bundle.

Before we chose McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, there were other options available like Carbon Black, Cisco and Trend Micro.

If I were to advise on this solution, it would be that irrespective of the endpoint a company uses, it should have a good endpoint configuration. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files. Threat hunting is marvelous.

The product must improve the ability to work with different operating systems like Windows and macOS. The CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors. The agent file size is higher. The number of services that run on a system is quite high. Other EDR solutions have only a single service running on it.

I have been working with the product from the day of inception. I am using the latest version of the solution.

The stability is good. I rate the stability a nine and a half out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten. The solution is suitable for small, medium, and large enterprises.

The support is great.

Positive

The initial setup is simple. It can be done in a couple of days. The solution is cloud-based.

The product’s aggressiveness in competing with the competitor's pricing is almost nil. The pricing is always high. I rate the pricing a three and a half out of ten.

We can compare the tool with SentinelOne and CrowdStrike. Kaspersky and Trend Micro cannot compete against the solution.

People must always evaluate the product first. They must see the difference in manageability and flexibility of the licenses. They must also consider the manageability and flexibility of the software before making a decision. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The product works as a preventive tool. It checks for signatures as well as behaviors.

If there is any malicious behavior in the workstation or server, the tool stops or isolates it automatically and generates alerts. It creates reports on the incidents and provides the details to us. The product is very easy to scale and implement.

The product must focus on improving the appliances. The console has a lot of bugs, and it creates many issues. It is very tedious to troubleshoot the issues sometimes. The support team does not help. We solve our problems by testing things we find on Google and other forums where people give suggestions about the product. The product has very limited options for creating policies. The product could provide more options for creating policies. The options must be customizable according to the user’s requirements.

I have been using the solution for more than two years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

The tool is scalable. We have implemented it across the organization. I would recommend the tool for both small and large companies.

The support team is the worst. The support team must improve its knowledge.

Negative

We used an anti-malware solution before we started using Trellix.

The solution is deployed on the cloud. The initial setup was simple.

The deployment took nearly a month. Trellix’s team helped us deploy the product. They were helpful during the purchasing and implementation process. Four or five people in the organization manage and maintain the solution.

The product’s pricing is reasonable. However, we have to have a minimum contract of three years. The licensing model is not so good. Advanced threat intelligence features are very expensive.

We are planning to change the vendor. We have one more year of contract on the product. Companies must use EDR, but they must research before choosing vendors. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My company's clients use the solution to detect the early stages of attacks and to react to the strange things that happen on the endpoints.

Visualization of cyberattacks is one of the most valuable features of the solution.

It is tough to comment on what needs improvement in the solution. At the moment, it is difficult to recall and comment on what needs to improve in the solution.

The solution lacks the ability to integrate with external platforms. In future releases of the solution, I would like to see the solution increase its integration capabilities with external platforms. At this moment, I want the solution to integrate with more XDR tools. The solution should provide its users an ease of administration in future releases.

My company has spoken to McAfee about their solution being on the pricier side. So, McAfee is aware that there is room for improvement in its pricing strategy.

I have been using McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response for over two years. So, my company has a partnership with McAfee. Though I don't remember the version of the solution I am working on, it is the latest one since it is a common security practice to use the updated version of the tool.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I won't be able to comment on the solution's scalability since, at the moment, we do not need to consider scalability or expansion. However, it is probably easy to scale up since the solution is deployed on AWS. My company has clients who run small, medium, and enterprise-sized businesses. The number of uses using the solution depends upon the company or business size. So, there have been times when a client using the solution has over 1000 users using the tool.

I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten.

Positive

The solution's initial setup process was easy and straightforward. On a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is very easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a ten out of ten. The solution is usually deployed on the cloud platform.

The solution is usually deployed on the cloud platform. Though unsure, I feel the solution is deployed using AWS since I am referring to the users in Europe. The deployment process took place over a few days. The deployment process is covered by the client and distribution services team. The deployment process involves fire and forget, wherein the agent is sent to the user. All the settings are within the agents, and only the installation needs to be done for the deployment process to be completed.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is high, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is pricey compared to other solutions in the market.

Though I cannot remember the approximate licensing cost of the solution, it would definitely depend upon the customer, the overall pricing of the solution, and the additional features.

One needs to incur retention costs in addition to the standard licensing fees paid for the solution.

I would tell those planning to use the solution in the future that if they already have McAfee products, then they should go for it since the solution integrates well with other McAfee tools and with some endpoint protection platforms or DLP that are deployed on-premises.

The software will have bugs in them at some point, and bug-related issues are to be taken care of by technical support. Our company reports such issues, and the technical support team tries to resolve them. Presently, this process works well for us. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.