McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Reviews

The use of the solution is the same as in any industry, like IT, manufacturing, or the banking sector. My company deals with customers who use McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator. In general, my company uses the product for various types of customers.

ENS is one of the features in the product that is useful as it basically services an antivirus solution. The DLP feature in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is good. McAfee Device Control and McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention (DLP) help users set the category filter, or we can set the classification based on which users can restrict the traffic that goes outside the organization.

There are challenges regarding the compatibility and agent functionality of the product. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement.

The setup and deployment phases need to be improved.

The issues with the integration capabilities of the product, specifically the ones that are deployed on an on-premises model, need to be improved.

I have been using McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator for five years. My company has a partnership with CrowdStrike and McAfee.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten. I had some issues with bugs and some breakdowns in the solution.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

Though the scalability of the product is good, if McAfee sorts out the connectivity issues related to the agents, then it can be made a better product. The product has been in the market for a long time. The tool has been in the market during a time when no other OEM products were even introduced. The tool should improve some of its services.

The product's initial setup phase was difficult since only a professional can do it. A fresher or a new person cannot take care of the installation of the tool. A fresher or a new person cannot take care of the installation of the tool. Agent installation is easy, but the other features related to the antivirus and DLP functionalities can be implemented only with the help of a professional or skilled person since they can be deployed only from the server console. The person should be aware of the server console functionality.

I faced many challenges when deploying the product, especially some connectivity and compatibility issues.

Though the tool is good for centralizing security management, there are a lot of issues in the product, which stem from compatibility issues with different operating systems. McAfee uses multiple engines to run on the endpoint system, which causes the engines and definitions to have many issues. Ultimately, everything in the tool is based on definitions, and it needs to be updated regularly.

There are certain limitations with the integration capabilities of the product because the tool doesn't support API integration, specifically for the on-premises products. The product offers some cloud solutions that can be integrated with APIs.

I rate the overall tool a six out of ten.

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

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

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.

I have been using this solution for five years.

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.

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.

Their technical support is average.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

On-premises

We use McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator to see attacks in real time. We also use it for storage as well.

I like the solution's feasibility. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is also better and easier to use than other ePOs.

The installation process is quite difficult and requires technical support.

I've been using this solution for one month.

It is a stable solution.

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is scalable, and we have 25 users in our organization. We are an enterprise level company.

The implementation process is complex and requires four to six people, including a QA person.

It was a complex process because we needed access approvals to use SaaS, and the URLs would get decommissioned most of the time. We also faced problems with end-to-end encryption.

I implemented it with the help of my senior architect.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator at eight.

On-premises

Easy interface, reliability, scalability, built-in reporting.

We integrate more and more client computers from different supported businesses across the globe into a single ePO environment managed by a single support team, thus reducing support staff and unifying security policies across organization providing the anti-malware protection to the endpoints (both to servers and to workstations).

a. Reporting: The pre-canned ePO queries can be improved

We use different versions of McAfee ePO for the last 10 years (v. 2.5 through v. 4.6).

No

No

No

Customer Service: GoodTechnical Support: Good. However there is no definite SLA when a complicate issue is escalated to McAfee Level 3 or to McAfee software developers.

We used to use Computers Associates AAO software till 2003. The McAfee manageability and price was much better.

Straightforward

We invited the vendor team. I’d rate their level of expertise 4 out of 5.

I like McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator software. It is great centralized security management software that allows management of various McAfee products on the client computers. McAfee ePO makes risk and compliance management in the organization simpler and more reliable.

Automatic workflow remediation

By setting up automatic workflows for specific tasks by the use of property tags there is less hands on intervention needed.

Although it has the ability to auto create service tickets, it needs to expand to allow more products this ability. It also seriously needs a better way to direct connect to remote users not located within the network.

12 years

Yes, someone who doesn’t understand their environment and the configuration needed cannot just turn everything on and let it go.

No

No, we were able to scale this from a single location within the US of 100 endpoints to 5,000+ globally within a week with only 10% of the systems having a problem that needed to be addressed because of a specialized configuration.

Customer Service: 8 out of 10Technical Support: 8 out of 10

Kaspersky, the management console is very cumbersome and difficult to manage and doesn’t allow for the fine grained control of ePO.

It’s straightforward until you get to some of the advanced components such as a DMZ and agent handler deployment.

In-house, I personally did the implementation, configuration and management.

Saves a company 20 man hours a week. The true dollar value ROI is going to be based on the cost of the product for a particular company, since that can vary depending on the negotiated contract terms.

This product will take 40 man hours for setup, configuration and deployment once the environment information is gathered.

Yes, Trend Micro

There is no other product out there with the control and overall security components that can do what ePO can.

I have been working with McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator since 2005.

We are a service provider and system integrator, and this is one of the solutions that we provide for our clients. Most of the deployments we have done are on-premises.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to configure and deploy everything from a single, web-based interface.

This solution ships with SQL Express, and we have issues related to database corruption in the event of power loss. Especially on this side of the world, we have a lot of power outages and most companies do not have backup power solutions. In most cases, when the power goes out, the database tends to corrupt a lot. For example, clients will be having trouble logging on because the login credentials are corrupt. They have to do something to make the solution more resilient or recoverable from power failure events, which may include creating their own database.

This is a stable solution to use. The only problem that I've noticed relates to updates, and it has only started recently. After getting an update, there are issues with connecting. It all comes down to how often the machines update their Windows OS. McAfee tends to have a problem with connectivity and stuff like that.

In terms of scalability, McAfee is the best there is from all of the products that I've used. Why I say that is because you can manage a lot of products if you install the endpoint security pack. The is one of the products that has impressed me over the years. There is a version of the solution that actually allows you to manage certain versions of Symantec products. So, this is a good product, and when it comes to scalability, I think it's one of those products that you won't go wrong with.

We do have some larger corporate clients, but there are not many of them. Most of the client base in Zimbabwe is small to medium-sized business. The majority have less than two-hundred and fifty PCs on-site, which I consider being small or medium size. We also do support for hospitals, schools, universities, and even government.

McAfee technical support is ok, but we do not contact them very often. Every year, they impose certifications on us, so in most cases, we have certifications for the different products that we support. This means that we hardly require support because we are well equipped when it comes to doing our job. If we do get something that we don't quite understand, McAfee has got a knowledge base that we usually refer to. This is helpful when it comes to some of the problems that we face.

Over the years, I've noticed that the initial setup is very easy. It may be because I've worked with it for a long time, but the initial setup is easy, and even when it comes to doing the configuring for the projects, it is not complex.

Most of the setups that I have done are on-premises, where I have to set up the physical machine, and I haven't had any problems. It usually takes less than thirty minutes for everything to be set up and the deployment complete.

We implement this solution for our clients.

This is a solution I recommend very much. For anybody who is implementing this solution, I suggest that they read through the product manuals and documentation. I have noticed that it is an advantage to read through the manuals because people who do not, tend to miss things, and then blame the product for not working. I would say that McAfee is a good product, and over the years I have found it to be very stable and very effective when it comes to managing other products. We have all that we wanted to do with McAfee.

In the time that I have been using this solution, I've noticed that when I perform a setup on different platforms or different networks, I've gotten to learn new things because each and every network is different. When it comes to troubleshooting network issues, I have learned a lot, especially things related to cybersecurity.

This is a very good product, but they have a database issue. Having a McAfee-only solution, rather than having to bring in a Microsoft product, or one from another vendor would make this solution perfect.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Comparatively, the pricing is quite low.

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.

On-premises

It works perfectly for reporting and creating policies. It's easier for the customers. Reporting is a significant functionality.

Application control and traffic encryption are the most valuable features. The encryption feature includes Drive Encryption and supports a lot of features like antivirus encryption. It consolidates my system.

There's one room for improvement. We need to consolidate multiple features into one console. It would be beneficial to have all the important features on a single platform. Instead of using separate agents for tasks like antivirus and demos, it would be better to have a unified agent that can handle everything.

I would like a unified agent that can handle multiple tasks.

Another useful feature would be an email solution. It could be helpful. Also, having the capability to check for data vulnerabilities would be a great addition. In the future release, I would like to have a feature that checks for vulnerabilities

I have been working with this solution for 20 years. I am currently working with Version 5.10.

Stability is medium. I would rate it six because it can be resource-intensive and impact performance.

Most of the features are scalable, especially when transitioning to newer versions.

I would give it a rating of ten for scalability. Approximately around 50 to 100 users are currently using McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator. Some clients are small businesses, while others are enterprise-level.

The tool itself is great, but the technical support is not always perfect. There have been some support issues.

When there are issues, it often takes a considerable amount of time to resolve them, especially for domain-related problems. We are not given the right support.

Negative

The initial setup is easy. I would rate it a ten out of ten. The deployment process depends on various factors, such as the network. Usually, it takes a few days.

The deployment process involves licensing, installing APL, integrating with the directory, and then configuring policies based on best practices. We also customize some policies to fit the client's environment.

The cost is high compared to other clients who prefer lower pricing.
In terms of pricing, I can give it an eight.

If you need any additional solutions, you would have to pay extra on a monthly basis.

I would rate it as the best, around nine, because it's easy to navigate and configure.

On-premises