Trellix Intrusion Prevention System Reviews

Our clients primarily use the solution for security purposes. We have it deployed on the endpoints.

The entire IPS is excellent.

It's pretty good at protecting our endpoints.

The implementation was pretty straightforward.

The solution can scale.

The product is stable.

It's an excellent solution for enterprise-level businesses.

I can't think of any area of improvement. It works pretty well for us.

The pricing could be improved.

The product offering could be enhanced a bit. I'm on the second-biggest offering and I have mostly common packets and features. They could offer a bit more to higher tiers. They also seem to mix and match other products within their suite of offerings and change those. There needs to be more consistency overall with what they offer.

I've been using the solution for a few years now.

As an enterprise-level solution, it's quite stable. We haven't found any bugs or glitches on the solution. It works well and we have no complaints.

The solution scales well for enterprises. A company can expand it if they need to. There aren't too many limitations.

We're actually the first line of support for our customers, so we are able to troubleshoot. However, the solution works quite well. We don't have too many issues where we would have to reach out to their support to assist us. Therefore, I can't really speak to their level of service. Reaching out to them is quite rare.

The implementation is not complex. It's quite straightforward. We find the entire process to be rather easy.

We're integrators. We can handle the implementation for our clients.

We're integrators. We're not customers.

We'd recommend the solution to other organizations. It works very well overall, and is excellent for enterprise-level businesses.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it at an eight. No solution is perfect. However, this one is pretty close.

We use the solution as a level of security for our organization. It can show us what's happening on our network so that we are able to monitor events effectively. We end up having to deal with many events and this helps us detect where a virus or malware is coming from. It helps buy us time so we can fight off the attack.

Overall the solution is very good. It offers great protection and gives us a good overview of what is on the network.

We would like to have a similar version that offers a bit less complexity. Currently, the settings and confirmations on the McAfee console are complex and complicated for our branches. I wouldn't describe this solution as easy to use.

The management console needs to be less complex and easier to navigate.

We've been using the solution for less than a year at this point. It's been about six months.

Overall, the solution is quite stable. That said, newer versions often cause the network to move quite slowly. However, it's stable. We don't find there to be bugs or glitches. It doesn't freeze. It's pretty reliable.

The solution can scale. We have about 500 users on the solution currently. It's a pretty big number, and we're able to manage everything quite well.

We do plan to continue to use this product into the future.

We've used technical support in the past and have found them to be quite good. They're better than other competitors. They're knowledgeable and responsive. I've been satisfied with their support so far.

The initial setup was not straightforward. It was a bit complex in our case.

I can't recall how long deployment took for us.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't use an integrator or reseller to assist in the process. I was able to do it independently.

There aren't any licensing costs associated with this solution.

Although we're not currently planning on switching, if we had to, we'd probably switch to Cyber Protection. Their support is very good.

Our company does not have a business relationship with McAfee. We're just customers at this time.

We are using the latest version of the solution, however, I'm not sure of what the version number is.

I'd recommend this solution to other organizations. It's worked well for us and we've been quite happy with it.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it at a nine. It's quite effective.

The primary use is to deploy sensors. We have two use cases: to predict the anomalous behavior and to predict the normal threshold for our network. 

The most valuable features are the customization of the signature and the unlimited amount of custom signatures in IPS.

The solution needs to improve the graphical interface. They had a limitation in some of the sensor modems as well. You probably need to buy a big model to get the solution in line. They don't give you the big model by default. During deployment, since everything goes down, all the traffic will be down. You have high variability compared to others. You need to deploy a lot of sensors and figure out the best practices. This may cost you a lot.

I think they should have a correlation of the IA deployment or IA policies. They should improve their policies to get the correlation and the variables from one policy.

Technical support was good, but can be improved. You need to send the ticket to a higher authority to get what you need. They need improvement in the first tier of technical support.

This is the first IPS solution we are using.

Deployment depends on the environment, on one of our projects, a minimum of four to seven months. You need about three people minimum for the deployment. We are defining service use agreements, and the support comes out and does preventative maintenance for two visits every month. For maintenance, you only need one person.

I have a team, and we handle implementation and deployment ourselves.

We looked at the Cisco IPS solution and found that they have multiple issues. If you want to submit or monitor anything in ASA, you should have a route to source the IPS engine. This is too difficult to deploy for most users. 

I would rate this solution eight out of ten. They have inefficient sensor hardware and you need to uninstall a lot of third party software to improve the graphical interface - like JavaScript or something like that.

We use it to enhance security on our EDGE network in all of our remote offices, as well as our data centers

We feel safer now. We are currently enhancing all of our network security. The IPS has proven that it can find events and items, which previously went under the radar.

We are definitely detecting things that we knew were always there, but couldn't see them before. We have seen a big increase in reaction time.

The ability to centrally manage all the IPS sensors, track the different security events generated by it, and customize the different policies, depending on their location.

I would like the ability to apply more filters or better customize reports in order to display information in a readable way. That would be nice. 

The tool is pretty stable when it comes to the IPS sensors. They mostly work in custom mode. They help in not generating any type of disruption in the service ever. 

The Network Security Managers could be more stable, agile, and work faster. When it comes to instability, there is room for improvement.

The scalability is great. You can keep adding sensors, depending on the need or the throughput that you will be handling. The tool allows you to grow it and keep adding components to it.

The technical support is pretty good for the most part. It is sort of hit or miss. When you call in, they usually are able to help you fairly quickly. Or, they escalate the issue to their DevOps team, if you help them find a bug or it's a problem with the tool.

This is our first IPS technology that we deployed in our EDGE network. We are users of other McAfee tools. We wanted everything to be able to talk to each other. We want everything to be compatible and centrally managed. That is why we went for this McAfee Network Security Platform.

Once you learn the ropes and understand how the deployment functions, the initial setup was pretty straightforward. The tool has made it quite easy.

We did it ourselves. We bought the solution, educated ourselves, and are in the process of finishing the deployment.

I did not handle the purchasing, but I believe it cost $15,000. There is an additional support fee, but I don't know how much it is.

We also looked at Cisco and Palo Alto.

The centrally managed solution allows for control of the tool and policies in a more straightforward manner. I would imagine other tools would take longer to do the same thing that we are doing now with this, even with a new security team.

This product is helping us grow, as we have a newly created security operations team.

It has a lot of functions, such as firewall. We are administrators, and we create some rules to protect our network. We also monitor the traffic in and out and have disk encryption on-premises. When we detect malware, we scan for the virus on the PC. We can then delete or block the malware.

We would like to have a simpler version. Some settings and functions on the McAfee console are complex and complicated. I want the management console to be simpler.

I have been using this solution for about six months.

It is quite stable, but we have some issues with the latest version. When we install the latest version, the traffic of the network is quite low.

It is scalable. We have around 500 users.

Their technical support is good. It is better than Symantec.

We were using Symantec. We switched because Broadcom bought Symantec, and their support was not very good.

I implemented it myself.

I would recommend this solution to others. It is a very good solution.

I would rate McAfee Network Security Platform a nine out of ten.

We use a lot of the functions this solution provides such as the firewall and the ability to check aliases. We can monitor and show the traffic that's moving in and out. When we detect malware, we scan for the virus on the PC and we can decide whether to delete or block the malware. I'm a junior product consultant and we are customers of McAfee. 

I like the monitoring feature where you can see all the traffic. 

It's a very good solution but we would like to have a simpler version. The management component could be simplified.

I've been using the solution for six months. 

The solution is quite stable although in the latest version I've noticed that the network traffic can be quite slow. We have 500 users in our company. 

The technical support is very good. 

The deployment was a little difficult, I did it myself. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.