Trellix Endpoint Security Platform Reviews

My company uses Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) to protect our computers.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it works fine with stability.

From an improvement perspective, I want everything in the solution to be free. I don't consider myself to be so sophisticated when it comes to Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS).

I have been using the trial version of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), but I have experience with the tool for around four years. I don't remember the version of the solution.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution.

I used the solution's technical support and was satisfied with their responses.

I have experience with Microsoft Defender, AVG, and Norton.

The product's initial setup was straightforward.

The solution's deployment by an end user can be done in three minutes.

I recommend the solution to others who plan to use it.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

McAfee is used to secure my laptop against online threats and malware. It detects and removes any potential issues from the laptop.

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.

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.

I would like to see less notifications.

I have been using this solution for about four to five months because I've just purchased my new laptop. It came with the latest version when I got the laptop.

The stability is good. I receive updates regularly, which is quite good.

It's quite straightforward. You have the dashboard to access all the data protection features, so it's easy to use.

The deployment hardly takes two to three minutes.

For the McAfee process, I didn't need to contact anybody. I just needed to switch on my laptop, and it started on its own.

You need to subscribe to McAfee. There's a subscription on a yearly basis. It's not that expensive; it's quite affordable.

I would suggest giving it a try. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. Due to the notifications, I would deduct one point. But overall, it's a nine. It's good.

Some of the solution's primary use cases include successfully adding devices through ESM GUI and setting up data storage via ELM.

Trellix Endpoint Security's dashboard is very flexible, and I can create my own user-specific dashboard depending on user privilege or preference.

With Trellix Endpoint Security, adding a device as a data source can be done one by one. Whenever I try to add a device like a firewall or a server, the accounts are enrolled one by one per added data source. It would be a lot easier if I could add multiple user accounts within a single device.

I have been testing Trellix Endpoint Security for around three months.

I have tried to contact the solution's technical support team. Whenever I tried to ask for partner support, the Trellix website would ask for my company email details. Then an email would come to my inbox saying that Trellix would get back to me shortly, but unfortunately, they did not. So I couldn't contact Trellix Endpoint Security's technical support.

I have worked with other security tools, such as CrowdStrike. The flexibility of the dashboard and filtering are useful features in Trellix Endpoint Security. Also, adding different elements to the SIEM infrastructure is not that complicated with Trellix Endpoint Security.

There's no need for any additional configuration settings to install Trellix Endpoint Security. You just access the web UI, and that's it.

It took me two months to implement Trellix Endpoint Security because of our company's hardware limitations.

My implementation strategy for Trellix Endpoint Security was to build a demonstration based on what the company would like me to do. So I built a SIEM infrastructure and got the images of the different tools first. Then from there, I tried to connect the different devices before I connected the data sources.

My advice is that users should have a fair background in MQL, which really helps a lot in investigating.

Overall, I rate Trellix Endpoint Security an eight out of ten.

We use McAfee MVISION Endpoint to protect our environment.

I am satisfied with this solution.

The performance is good. 

I would like to see more automation.

I have been working with McAfee MVISION Endpoint for at least ten years.

McAfee MVISION Endpoint is a stable solution.

In our company, we have 650 users.

At this time, there are no plans to increase our usage.

Technical support is good.

I did not complete the installation myself.

We have a team of five to maintain and deploy this solution.

I had some assistance from a technician.

Licensing fees are paid yearly.

We are currently, exploring other solutions.

I would recommend this solution for others who are interested in using it.

I would rate the McAfee MVISION Endpoint solution an eight out of ten.

I used it in my previous company. From an end-user perspective, I was the manager of the Cyber Defense Center that was in charge of the whole deployment and daily operations. I was using it as a Site Media Operations Manager.

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.

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.

I used it for one year. 

I have no complaints. I would rate them a five out of five.

It was a new deployment. We previously didn't have any similar solution in that company.

It was pretty straightforward. Its deployment took half a month. It was quite a big deployment. We had quite a lot of end-user devices. We deployed it for 10,000 devices. We had around 20 security operations staff members at that time.

It was driven by an in-house engineering team, but we leveraged some integrator companies as well. We had three members in the engineering team who took care of the deployment and everyday operations. During the deployment phase, we got help from integrators. So, we had two additional FTEs during the six-month implementation period.

In terms of ROI, if one is the best, I would rate it a two out of five. We had some false positive detections. We even had some incidents that were not detected. We did not get the expected level of visibility through FireEye.

It was an annual fee. There was just one overall fee.

It was a very hard decision to make. We did a comparison with some other competitor products. One of them was Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR, which was the biggest competitor at that time. We even checked Microsoft ATP and McAfee. So, we compared a couple of products before selecting FireEye.

Organizations trying to or going for the FireEye solution should understand that they won't be able to see under the hood or what is happening within the product. FireEye is quite a black box solution. Understanding why certain findings got a particular verdict is not easy. If you want well-automated operations and you don't have an advanced operations team that wants to check the verdicts and understand how the product is working and making decisions, then it is good for you. If you have proper engineering skills on board and your operations teams want to understand the basic logic within the product that they are using on a daily basis, this might not be the best product for you.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

I am not liberty to describe our use cases, as this information is confidential. 

The primary reason the solution is good is because of its ease-of-use. It is easy to handle and create policies. 

While I cannot recall anything specific at the moment, there are many areas of the solution that I wish to see improved. 

We have been using McAfee Endpoint Security for more than three years.

The solution is very stable. 

The initial setup was very straightforward. 

We primarily use the solution for security. We use it to detect threats and cyber attacks.

The product is easy to use.

It's a stable solution with good performance. 

The scalability is good.

The installation process is very straightforward.

We would like to solution to offer better security. 

I've been dealing with the solution for years.

The product is quite stable. The performance has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find the product to be quite reliable.

The solution is capable of scaling. It's not a problem. We have the solution on around 300 endpoints. 

We have around 150 to 160 users on the solution currently.

We do plan to increase usage in the future.

I've never contacted technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

It's not a difficult solution to set up. It's pretty straightforward and simple. 

I don't recall how much time did it took. It was one of my team members that actually was occupied with the task. It was a while ago as well. I don't know anymore.

We worked with external consultants. I don't know exactly what the scope was, however. 

We bought a four-year license for the product. We're under a contract with them for that amount of time. 

We did not evaluate any other EDR products before choosing FireEye. 

We are just customers and end-users of the product. We don't have a special business relationship with the company. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. I don't know the version number off-hand. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations.

We are using  McAfee Endpoint Security to protect the business.

McAfee Endpoint Security is easy to use, and it integrates well.

The performance is good.

The security of this solution needs improvement.

I have been using McAfee for a couple of years.

I believe that we are using the latest version.

McAfee Endpoint Security is a stable solution. We don't have any issues with the stability of this product.

I don't have the exact count, but we have thousands of users in our organization who use  McAfee Endpoint Security.

I have not contacted technical support.

I was not involved in the installation of McAfee Endpoint Security.

Licensing is paid yearly.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate McAfee Endpoint Security a seven out of ten.