Trellix Endpoint Security Platform Reviews

Overall, we handle the implementation of the solution, taking into account the policy required to secure the network.

We primarily use McAfee Endpoint Security for data loss and endpoint protection.

An area in need of improvement involves the overview, which usually does not enable one to get the value in reports.

Upon receipt of the incident, the review is important. Based on this it is possible to construct a workflow for closing the case. 

It is crucial to keep the data inside the department. Receipt of the incident is a pain point since there is a need to engage one's system administrator as part of the data loss protection consent requirements and this involves sensitive information. However, nothing will be accomplished with a system administrator, only with a compliance administrator who is fully knowledgeable. 

The solution is not stable and the ecosystem enters the picture for those responsible. Each system is connected in a centralized manner to give a holistic view of one's endpoint and environment. This is how things are at present and it offers a great way of setting things up. But, it poses an issue that a person cannot translate the value of the information once the entire system is integrated into a single console. Nothing will be accomplished in the system if incidents are frequently received but with no correlation between them. There is a need for combining IP analytics with artificial intelligence in respect of these reports. 

The initial setup was complex and required too many servers.

A perpetual license is not an option with McAfee Endpoint Security or anyone else for that matter. 

The price of the solution is high in Asia, in contrast to Symantec, which gives you a 70% discount on the closing of the project. The issue at hand involves the people. McAfee did have some big clients in my country and region. However, it did not have many clients. 

The solution is deployed on-premises since it mostly involves a bank. 

Unfortunately, most clients have chosen to remove McAfee and have switched to Silence because of its ease of use. They are not interested in updates. 

I feel McAfee Endpoint Security is a good, mature product, although the price of the technology poses an issue. In Pakistan and Asia, there is a different kind of field environment than in Europe and the United States. While we cannot offer our clients managed services, which is what everyone wants, in Europe and the United States they can. 

I rate McAfee Endpoint Security as a six out of ten. 

We use the solution to protect our endpoint systems.

I have found the most valuable features to be the ability to manage the solution from anywhere and having an overview of the companies security. I can see which computers are patched, which computers are updated, and which ones might have possible infections or problems. Additionally, The solution is always up to date because there are updates frequently. Recently, MVISION was added and it is a new feature that has some advanced security qualities.

I have been using the solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the solution to be scalable. We have approximately 60 users using this solution in our organization.

We used Symantec a long time ago.

The installation is very easy.

We did the implementation of the solution ourselves. We have a team of two that does the deployment and implementation.

There is a one-year and a three-year license available for this solution, we are currently on a three-year license. There are more secure featured solutions from McAfee on the market but for smaller companies like ours, they are too expensive.

Since we are a public utility company there are some laws here when it comes to purchasing, we have procurement procedures. We have to do tendering and then companies apply. I am very happy with the solution. If I could extend the license, for example, for three more years, I will do it immediately. We are in the process now. 

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate McAfee Endpoint Security ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for endpoint security.

The solution offers very good endpoint security.

The solution is quite stable.

We've found the pricing to be pretty good. It's not too expensive.

The solution needs to offer better local technical support.

I would like to see Endpoint Vulnerability Assessment included in the solution in the future.

We've been using the solution for about ten or so years now. It's been a while. It's likely been around a decade.

The stability of the solution is very reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is great.

We don't have very good local technical support. The company really needs to build out its ability to support clients at a local level. We're not overly satisfied with the level of help we receive due t the lack of local support.

I wasn't responsible for the initial setup. I can't really speak to how easy or difficult the solution is to set up or how long the deployment takes.

The pricing is pretty reasonable. It's not too expensive.

We're just a customer and end-user. We aren't affiliated with McAfee and do not have a business relationship with them.

I wouldn't recommend this solution to other companies, at least not in Indonesia. There's no local support of the product here and it affects our ability to leverage it properly.

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

The two primary use cases are towards the process monitor and malware detection for APT (Advanced Persistent Threat).

FireEye Endpoint Security has improved our customers' organizations. Before a customer was with us, they may have worked with Windows Defender. This is for suspicious activity. Then they implement the next solution that is for network monitoring. With that, they deploy the EGX for info security. Now, with these components, they have a lot of visibility on their network and endpoint activity.

The most valuable feature that my customers have found with solution is the capacity to collect all the information for forensic analysis purposes.

In my personal and professional view, I think the reports need more development. They need more details on the reports and more details taking the executive view into consideration.

These reports contain the information that is gathered at the intake solutions. They are more geared for the technician and I think they need more executive information because it is important to talk to the main executives, and for them to see what is happening related to some of those suspicious activities.

I have been using FireEye Endpoint Security for something like 4 years.

In terms of stability, we have had some issue related to the deployment and hardware requirements, because most customers need to revalidate all those requirements. For example, if your deployment was on a hyper B environment, we don't know their server. They decrease in the performance of the appliance because in some cases, the requirements are not specifically stated, including the CP or reserve for those components. For example, I may define that the memory requirement is 16 gigabytes with a specific machine build.

FireEye Endpoint Security's scalability is awesome. I think it is one of the best on that front. This is because many of its steps are related to the optimization of whole the process, it's ratings and solutions with mail, social network, input solutions, and next generation CMM like Kellogg's. All these are on the single platform called FS. I sold a lot. You can see its integration with print solutions. That's very amazing.

We have companies with a lot of endpoints. We think we have something like 4000 agents and 2 main appliances.

Technical support is really great. The support is generally very fast, responding within one day.

The main deployment is very simple because it's related to the deployment of an OVA file. The physical deployment is no problem.

But the deployment needs some special knowledge about the quick console.

Deployment tales about one week or less.

If you compare your solution without the antivirus solution, and the price of the agent, it is a little bit expensive. But when you learn more about the value of forensic analysis, you will pay those costs. The price is expensive compared with other solutions, with the competitors. But it is really fast and really flexible and the user can research the information.

I think they checked out Kaspersky as well.

I would recommend to check how they might pull reports. For example, where the customer modes fall because it's an independent investigation related to an IP.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give FireEye Endpoint Security a ten, because it's the only good option.

We are using it on our network as protection.

An area of improvement for this solution is to make it easier to manage.

I have been using the solution for one year.

The solution is stable.

It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment.

The desktop firewall is a great product. It can be set to allow only authorized applications to communicate with the internet. In this way, it can block the changes for an unknown application to access our command and control server and to receive encryption keys. It is very good at preventing crypto-malware.

Their drive encryption is perfect.

You can create a complete inventory of all available executable files on the machine and whitelist the ones that you want, then lock the machine so that nothing else can be executed.

The web filtering is quite good at the endpoint level.

The threat intelligence exchange product is great because at the moment malware is detected on one device or other devices and endpoints, our servers are informed about the threats and they will be automatically recognized.

The solution has a ton of products and great features.

ePO can now be integrated with products from other vendors such as BeyondTrust, Boldon James, Titus, and you can even control Microsoft BitLocker. The architecture is easily extended and upgraded.

The vendor should simplify the way they bundle the products because it's very hard to explain to customers what products contain which features.

This product requires Microsoft SQL Server as a database and you have to deploy it yourself, then later integrate it with the console. 

I have been using McAfee Endpoint Security since it first entered the market, which was several years ago.

This is a stable product. I have been working with their console since version 4.6 in 2011 and in cases where it stopped working, I was able to recover easily and it was repaired when the issue was solved. None of them crashed in a way that you could not recover from and fix it. The repairs were always relatively easy.

It is very scalable. We have four or five people in the office, but I have a few thousand workstations that are being protected by it. We have more than 10 ePO consoles, with some on-premises and some on the cloud.

We rarely needed to contact support from the vendor. In the situations when we needed some configuration from them, the response was always good.

We are McAfee partners, so I have used almost all of their endpoint products.

The initial setup is a little bit complicated, although this is because it has a tremendous number of features. Almost anything that you can think of can be configured.

The time required to deploy an ePO server with endpoint security depends on the number of endpoints in the environment, as well as the business processes. Some things require monitoring and observation over time, but in general, it can be set up over two or three days.

Our in-house team is responsible for the deployment, which requires one engineer on-site. We also provide support to our clients.

The pricing is great and licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis.

In general, it is a really great product and I recommend it. I don't have any objections and most of the users only use perhaps 25% of the features that are available. I cannot remember a time that I needed a feature and it wasn't available in the console.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

McAfee Endpoint Security can be used for threat protection, for malware protection, and for data loss prevention by encrypting the end user devices using full depth encryption.

We are using the latest version minus two because we generally update the antivirus to the current version after testing it. So generally it is two versions behind.

We have three versions in our network, one is the latest version, then we have a minus one on critical machines and minus two on the endpoints.

The most valuable feature of McAfee Endpoint Security is that it is stable. It is a good product.

In terms off what could be improved, it is a little bit slow.

Additionally, the encryption part definitely needs to be improved.

We have faced certain issues recovering the data from systems which could not be fully encrypted by McAfee and then the decryption was a nightmare, it took a lot of time. Some could not even be recovered. That was one issue. 

The endpoint protection and anti malware features are good. But encryption and decryption are a bit slow and it's a tedious job.

The second issue is that the public dashboards are out-of-the box kinds of features, so they need to be configured, which takes a lot of time.

Finally, there is an issue with the device timing features for allowing certain devices within the network for what we call USB protection. For master devices or static Bluetooth devices which need to be connected, the white-listing of those devices needs to be more straightforward, it is currently highly technical.

The dashboard and encryption should be improved. 

There is a cloud-based environment available from McAfee which is called MOVE. If the customer has already implemented it on-premises, it should be integratable with the MOVE version. We discussed this with McAfee and they said encryption data can not be moved to cloud. This means if I move my antivirus server to the cloud, I still need to maintain a separate encryption server within my network. That is the challenge.

We would like to see all the features available on cloud.

I have been using McAfee Endpoint Security for three years.

McAfee Endpoint Security is a stable product. 

In terms of scalability, as of now, we have licensing for 2000 users. We originally purchased it for 1800 users. Now we have renewed it for another year for 2000 users.

It's not scalable now because we have endpoint detection and response, the new technology which has been released by many companies, including McAfee. If we need to move to EDR, we will need to remove this and to implement the EDR across different products.

We require three people to deploy and maintain the solution.

Before switching to McAfee Endpoint Security, we were using Trend Micro.

The initial installation went on for two and a half months.

It was straightforward for Endpoint Protection Antivirus for encryption, but it took some time. This McAfee encryption had some issues with Windows 8 and Windows 7 older versions. For new versions it runs smoothly.

When we implemented three years back we used a system integrator, our partners, for doing the installation.

We have 1700+ systems so we needed to be setup with this solution.

I think the costing is fine compared to other products. Cost-wise you definitely get value for your money.

We have already recommended it.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate McAfee Endpoint Security as a seven.

We provide services. We mainly use this solution for endpoint security and protection. We have cloud, hybrid, and on-premises deployments.

A big advantage of McAfee Endpoint Security is the ability to manage very big environments. We are supporting environments with 200,000 to 300,000 endpoints. The ability to manage with one single console is very important for us.

McAfee has phenomenally improved in terms of detection. It provides real-time detection and response with the error, Real Protect, and reputations. It is not only based on signatures but also on behavior analytics, artificial intelligence, or machine learning. We have environments that never had issues with ransomware in the last 20 years. McAfee has a very good performance in this field.

The management console is a little bit difficult to understand for admins. You need a lot of time in order to become familiar with that. It is a little bit complicated and not too easy to understand. 

Its price can also be improved. Its price is higher than its competitors.

McAfee also needs to have better cloud integration and more data centers in the EU. The cloud center should be in Europe or in Germany. In Germany, it is really important to have access to your data within the same country. Customer data needs to be placed and processed in the same country.

I have been using this solution for 20 years. 

McAfee is very big. You can implement it in a very small environment but also in a very big environment. You don't have limits or limitations.

Technical support could be better. The first level of technical support has to support about 30 or 40 products, which is an impossible number to support. Therefore, their support teams at the first level needs the support of product specialists. You, in any case, get a professional product specialist at the second level, some times at the first level.

For the initial setup, McAfee always requires some kind of consulting, which is good for us as a provider. A customer cannot do an installation without help. It is not too easy for a customer, but it is fine for consultants.

Its price is very high. It is higher than its competitors, and it should be less.

You would be very happy with McAfee if you have the know-how of this solution and you have somebody who is an expert at this solution. McAfee is not too easy to understand, but when you understand the solution, you could be very happy with it.

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