Trellix MOVE AntiVirus Reviews

We are using this solution to protect our PCs.

The product works well, once you know how to use it.

The interface is not so easy to use and could be improved.

We have been using McAfee MOVE AntiVirus for approximately two years.

This is a stable product and we plan to continue using it in the future.

We have approximately 600 users and two administrators.

An integrator deployed this product for us.

In summary, this is a good antivirus and I can recommend it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The solution is stable. In comparison, when I used Trend Micro, I recall having multiple issues. 

Trend Micro was tedious to install and the implementation of its policy organization-wide was a challenge. Often file codes wouldn't work or the performance was off. With McAfee, I'm not seeing these same issues, although, to be fair, I've only worked with it for a month. The performance seems to be better, and it's less challenging to work with.

Overall, the policies are good. They are easy to implement.

I found that the interface is a little bit confusing. It's over-stuffed. If a new IT person comes in, it is difficult to understand how the McAfee console works. It needs to be more user-friendly and not as complicated.

It would be nice if the solution could add in some ransomware features. 

I haven't been using the solution for too long. It's something we use at my new company. However, the license is about to expire, and we may be looking into other options. I've only really used it for a month.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

We have about 30 or so people that are using the solution.

We do not plan on increasing usage and may discontinue usage in general. We are currently considering alternatives.

I've never had a chance to reach out to technical support. I've only been using the solution for a month and the license s coming to an end. Therefore, there's never been a reason for me to reach out. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are in general.

In my previous organization, I used Trend Micro.

I wasn't involved in the installation of the solution. The product was already installed when I began at the company. Therefore, I wasn't a part of the process.

I cannot speak to the actual cost of the solution. It's not an aspect of the product I deal with.

It's a little bit tough to manage the license. I have to purchase separate licenses for 30 users that cover ransomware protection.

In the present company, we are using McAfee, however, it's about to end license duration. We are looking for a good alternative to it.

We are customers and end-users.

I cannot recall the exact version number of our current solution.

We are doing R&D right now. I'm new to this organization and I have to manage it all. I find that right now, with McAfee, we're trying to figure out what to do with it. It's up for renewal. We're working to decide if it should stay or if we should switch to something new. 

The console is not user-friendly and that's a bit of a turn-off. It's making us reconsider the product.

That said, I'd recommend the solution to other organizations. It's good. It's just that, if I appointed a new trainee and I asked him to set the policy for the security on a user's laptop he would just get annoyed. If it was more user-friendly I wouldn't have to worry about the onboarding process so much. New team members would just be able to handle the tasks and not be confused by the technology itself.

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

We are partners with McAfee and I'm a senior solution architect. 

McAfee not only provides the antivirus, but they provide an EDR kind of solution which makes it possible for there to be zero attacks. That scenario certainly helps customers - everything can be combined in a single pane of glass from the endpoint and the server infrastructure security perspective. I like that the solution consumes less of what it stores on endpoints. When it's performing a full-system scan, it consumes less CPU and memory resources, so a user can continue working and not be aware the scanning is occurring. It also supports the real-time memory scan, protecting the user from the real-time product and from any kind of EXE file or monitoring activity. I think the endpoint protection is a very nice feature of this product. McAfee has a more simplified approach to providing security for endpoints.

This solution requires you to deploy multiple agents for multiple jobs which is unfortunate. There is the antivirus, there is a DLP client, there is a media client. I'd like to see all of these combined into a single agent that does everything without consuming significant resources. That would be a great innovation from the endpoint security point of view. Rather than having different tools, the DLP DR should be integrated and simplified into one single security solution. 

I've been using this solution for a couple of months. 

This is a stable solution. 

The solution is scalable. In general, it requires admin resources and user resources. 

The initial setup requires a certain skill set because anyone wanting to deploy such a tool needs to be aware of the best practices in terms of how the security should be designed, areas such as data configuration and product configuration. A simple antivirus installation should only take a couple of minutes but when it comes to the enterprise grade or installation on a server, it takes time because a lot of planning is required. The planning takes time, not the installation.

There is a one-year or three-year licensing option. 

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

This is not something that I actively use. It is automatically installed on my PC. It's an automatic antivirus. There is nothing needed from me to get it to work.

It is used for protection and it protects the computer itself. 

It protects the system from viruses and hacking.

I would like to see integration with SharePoint.

This solution has been installed on my PC for two years.

It's a stable solution.

It's a scalable product. We have 200 users in our organization.

While it is installed on my computer, I will continue to use it.

I have not had any experience with technical support.

We haven't used anything other than McAfee.

It was already installed on my PC.

The licensing is managed by my IT team.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. I haven't had any issues. It's working fine.

I would rate McAfee MOVE AntiVirus a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for the general protection of the device.

My usage is fairly secure in terms of how I use it and where I access it from.

I haven't been faced with any issues.

I haven't been exposed to any major threats.

There have never been any issues in terms of security, so it's assumed that McAfee is doing its job well.

I have been using McAfee since I purchased my first laptop. It's been a few years.

It's stable. I have been using it for many years and haven't faced any issues with stability.

I have not contacted technical support. My dealer is in contact with them for me.

My equipment dealer completed the installation.

There is a license. There is a subscription fee that you have to pay for.

It could be cheaper, but anybody would like a good product at a lesser price.

Over the years it has become expensive but that is the norm. I have had it for so many years now, I don't really think of changing it.

Of course, I would recommend this solution to others. Many people already do and several of my friends or family already have it. My family, and friends circle, have been using it for a long time.

My requirements are not any different. I will continue to use this solution.

I would rate McAfee MOVE AntiVirus an eight out of ten.

We usually use this solution for protecting the endpoints. It is deployed centrally on all corporate workstations and laptops in my organization.

It can be set up easily and then connected with the server to get the latest updates.

This solution is okay for users who are just office personnel. Developers or users who heavily use their laptops complain that it really slows down their laptops. Using this solution can be a big challenge from the performance perspective if you need a productive system that locally runs multiple VMs.

I have been using this solution for the last five years. It's deployed on all laptops in my organization.

It is stable.

We have approximately 8,000 users.

I don't have any issues.

The initial setup is easy. It may be a part of our golden image approach. 

I would not recommend it, but I also do not complain too much about using this solution. 

I would rate McAfee MOVE AntiVirus an eight out of ten. Its performance needs to be improved.

We run it across the organization for protecting the individual work locations and workstations. It could be a laptop, desktop, or server. A client version of McAfee End Point Security is installed on each and every desktop or laptop.

It completely monitors all the traffic and downloads. It also scans the files that are configured to be scanned. For example, any audio files, MOV files, or large files that we download. All such files will go through the McAfee MOVE AntiVirus to ensure that the virus is not getting into our network and systems.

The good part of this solution is that it protects the systems from malware etc. It also has a good user interface.

Sometimes, the updates don't happen successfully. The updates start, but they are not completed. Let's say there is a process that runs on the server-side every night, and it pushes the updates. Sometimes, these updates fail. I'm not sure whether it is a McAfee's problem or an internal problem with our systems. 

If this is really an issue with McAfee MOVE AntiVirus, McAfee can work on it and improve it in the next release. If it is an internal issue, I need to figure out why it is happening within the organization. We may need to take some technical support from McAfee to see what the problem is and then we need to get it fixed. At this point in time, all I know is that it happens sometimes.

We have been using this solution in our organization for the last two years. 

It is scalable for now. Currently, around 200 users are using it. Our organization is growing, and we're not getting any scalability issues at this point in time. 

I have never heard of any issues with technical support. That means technical support is good. If something comes to my notice or I have to get involved, then there is a problem.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is good.

We have only one team member who takes care of the implementation, which is kind of a scheduled job. Whenever we set up the environment for a particular user, this is a mandatory software that we install. This is the protocol that we follow across the organization for new configurations. 

After this software is set up, it is updated with push updates via servers. It's all automatic. So, we don't need too many resources to take care of the implementation, unless there is a problem that needs to be looked into.

I would definitely recommend McAfee MOVE AntiVirus to others. As of now, I don't see any problem. I haven't got a complete hold of what is happening over here. Maybe the updates are finding that we don't have any virus in the system. So, it's definitely satisfactory.

I would rate McAfee MOVE AntiVirus a seven out of ten. 

We use McAfee MOVE AntiVirus for a number of things - the normal endpoint firewall, DLP, solidcore, and more. We have a solution that is at the server. Then we have super agents at the branches, because we are a bank. We use McAfee Data Exchange Layer. We use also use McAfee Endpoint Security. We have all the models that come under McAfee Endpoint Security.

The features that I have found most valuable are its ability to detect and delete known malware and the DLP in particular - that's to protect data loss to USB devices.

We are currently doing a project where we need assistance on the File Integrity Monitoring feature for McAfee as well as the ability to do classification of data. That feature is there for data protection. We need help to implement it properly.

They could improve the monitoring and classification of the data features.

Additionally, I want to experience the EDR of McAfee. Basically, EDR is the most potent threat now, that's the major concern for a lot of people. This is what is called the file-less attacks. Processes that run in memory, traditional antivirus software are not able to detect that. So the EDR feature has been made to provide the defense mechanism for the endpoint. Those processes can be stopped from running in memory once they are seen as malicious. That's what I understand EDR does. So I want to experience the EDR feature for McAfee to see how that compares with what we are currently using.

We have been using McAfee for more than 10 years. 

We have a local vendor that supports us.

The product is stable. It has worked for us over the years.

As I mentioned, we have this architecture of super agents across network branches. That's what we have done to ensure that, with respect to boundary constraints, only super agents pick up updates from the head office and distribute to the branches.

As a matter of fact, we've only done the deployment to a Microsoft environment. None for Linux or Unix. We haven't done any McAfee for Linux or Unix.

We can still improve on scalability. In fact, some of these things, also depend on other factors and not necessarily on the product. It's very important to put this thing in perspective. The operating environment challenges can also affect how scalable things can be. It's not necessary on the product.

I don't blame the scalability on the product, I am also looking at the operating environment.

I would rate the scalability a six or seven.

We are quite satisfied with customer support. We had a challenge about two years ago when we were not getting enough support. But the partner has been able to resolve that now.

We do have other anti-malware tools. That's because of the decision we made some time ago for file-less attack scenarios. Because we didn't have McAfee's EDR feature at the time we had to go for another product, specifically for EDR. We are thinking of evaluating EDR for McAfee sometime in the future to see whether we can consolidate our endpoint protection with only McAfee. So there's room for McAfee to evaluate EDR. That's the only feature that we don't have. 

In the past we tried ESET. I will say that McAfee happens to be a better product for us. Based on experience, if I'm comparing McAfee to ESET, I prefer McAfee. 

McAfee is not that easy, you need to be trained. But because we have an agreement with the vendor that supports us, they provide technical support and assistance to us anytime we need help for any kind of deployment. That's the arrangement that we have.

Deployment took about a month or so.

Going forward, we are trying to convince the vendor to give our in-house staff training to build some level of competence, which hasn't happened yet. That will be one of our medium-term or short-term goals.

We had different experiences. We have other challenges that affect our ability to deploy, which are internal challenges. Typically, deploying the solution should not be that difficult. It's all about getting the right resources to get a deployment done. It's not much of a big deal. It's all about our own internal challenges that we have to overcome.

McAfee is known to be one of the best anti-malware products out there. We are aware of what's happening in the industry.

The only advice I would give is to ensure there's a proper business arrangement in terms of the support. If there is no support from the vendor deploying the solution, then they must enforce training and knowledge transfer during the project implementation period so that there can be in-house support. Otherwise, they should have a kind of agreement that can confirm that the vendors can support them after deploying the solution.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate McAfee MOVE AntiVirus an eight.