What is our primary use case?
The solution has been in place for quite some time – three or four years. We've renewed it several times, and we upgraded from Gen 3 to Gen 4 hardware at one point as well.
Currently, it's integrated with our firewall and McAfee IPS. We also have network-based sandboxing deployed. It uses static and dynamic analysis engines, so we get alerts if malicious traffic is detected or harmful objects are downloaded.
We've been using their PX solution for packet capture, which is the core of their NDR functionality. But we haven't fully adopted the combined product – NX and PX – yet because they are still separate.
The storage requirements for raw packet capture, especially with our traffic levels, make it quite expensive. And that's true for many security products. I feel like NDR is pretty expensive.
However, this is especially true about raw packet capture for network telemetry – the storage requirements with RAID 0 become quite expensive, regardless of the solution.
How has it helped my organization?
We had a serious incident where an attacker attempted a web shell attack on one of our web servers [DevOps server]. We were able to identify that the hackers used a malicious script and tried to target specific files. The hacker also tried to make a copy of some files.
We wanted to cross-reference that activity with the network traffic just to be sure there was no lateral movement. With Trellix, we easily confirmed that there was no lateral network involvement and that nothing else was infected. It helped us correlate the events and feel confident in our containment.
Trellix NDR was effective in that situation.
Morevoer, we've integrated this solution with our SIEM. There's a degree of integration provided by Trellix with their solution, and we're satisfied with that. However, without the SIEM, that's the extent of our integrations at the moment.
We're exploring further options due to organizational shifts towards the cloud, potentially moving away from a hybrid environment. We're assessing SaaS-based SIEM solutions. Trellix has its own offering, Helix, which we've evaluated and even purchased in the past. Ultimately, we discontinued its use. To summarize, our primary integration right now is with our SIEM.
The SIEM integrates well with our threat intelligence sources. We also have some secondary integrations in place. Overall, things are running smoothly.
What is most valuable?
The in-depth investigation capabilities are a major advantage. When the system flags something as malicious, it provides a packet capture of that activity within the environment.
That helps my team quickly identify additional context that most other tools wouldn't offer – like source IP or base64 encoded data. We can also see DNS requests and other details that aren't readily available in solutions like Check Point or others that we've tried.
The detection itself is solid, and their sandboxing is powerful.
There's a learning curve – you need a strong grasp of OS-level changes, process forking, registry changes, and the potential impact of those. But with that knowledge, the level of information Trellix provides is far greater than what we've seen elsewhere.
The real-time response capability of Trellix has been quite effective, although it's not very fast. The key is this solution's concept of 'preference zero.' They don't immediately act on a zero-day. For example, the solution has seen a piece of malware for the first time. It'll let it in, then do sandboxing. Maybe after four or five minutes, it identifies that specific file's DNX Secure Store as malicious. At that point, they update the static analysis engine, and it gets detected if anything else tries to download the same file.
There is that initial 'preference zero' concept, like with Panda. You may not hold traffic in the network. That's standard in the industry; we don't do much about it. To address that, we also have endpoint solutions. We use SentinelOne in our environment, which helps us identify threats like Western Bureaus and others.
What needs improvement?
The analytics could be better. It seems heavily influenced by the McAfee and FireEye integration, and that integration still isn't seamless.
STG needs to... I'm not sure what their roadmap is; they've mentioned full integration, but it hasn't materialized yet. Both the McAfee and FireEye engineering teams need to accelerate the process, as it would definitely benefit customers. The integration between Nextiva and Trellix could also use some work.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for seven years. I have been involved since the FireEye days. That's when I started working with it.
We're on version 9.1.5.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. It's quite stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We've upgraded without any major hiccups – I'd rate scalability a nine out of ten. We've smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one. The current appliance supports 2.5 Gbps of traffic, and we're currently handling around 300-500 Mbps without issue. Scalability is definitely there, we've never faced any problems in that regard.
We have approximately 500+ users. However, we also have applications hosted here, along with multiple IPC tunnels. We're using Netskope's Zero Trust Web DNA as well. So, 500+ users, but typical traffic averages around 300 to 400 Mbps.
How are customer service and support?
The customer service and support are really good. Trellix offer multiple contact options – you can call and get immediate assistance from someone in Israel, Singapore, Japan, or even India. Plus, they offer chat support through Teams or Webex.
Trellix's documentation portal is also good.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We've used Forcepoint, NetFlow, SentinelOne, Trellix, Arista…some Splunk, and some Elastic as well. It's a mix of tools across different security domains.
These are all security-focused products. Security is my primary focus.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was really straightforward. It took maybe a day to complete the upgrade.
We spent some time getting the prerequisites ready, which took a bit longer, but the actual deployment was very fast.
So you just identify the network where you want to connect it and just plug it in. It only took half a day.
Therefore, the preparation took some time, but the deployment itself was quick.
Handling upgrades:
We have a practice where network device upgrades take priority - starting with the App Firewall and working our way through Web Proxy and so on. We avoid parallel endpoint upgrades as we've had challenges with those.
Trellix releases sandbox system updates yearly, which are fine. Those don't require downtime. However, operating system upgrades are a factor.
We review KBR details thoroughly. Three or four months ago, we went from 9.1.4 to 9.1.5, and we're evaluating a possible upgrade to version 10, perhaps next month.
Generally, we follow the n-1 version strategy. But if there are significant new features in a release, we might upgrade sooner. Overall, it's manageable – we upgrade frequently, and this particular solution hasn't caused downtime issues. Plus, we use DNS-based global [settings/configuration?], so downtime isn't a major concern.
What about the implementation team?
For the deployment process, we needed two or three engineers. The physical appliance mounting and setup require multiple people. Trellix's appliances are very heavy.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing is fair, a little expensive, but fair. We've evaluated other products, and they're similarly priced. It's a bit on the expensive side, but we don't want to compromise with cheap, less reliable solutions.
We want quality. It's like... you might not opt for the top-of-the-line Apple product, but Samsung is a good choice. We wouldn't go for an Oppo, VIVO or ASUS type of device.
Overall, I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with one being expensive and ten being very cheap.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.
Potential customers should definitely evaluate their specific use cases, budget, and commercial considerations. The product itself is good, there's no doubt. But it's essential to understand your use cases – then I'd definitely recommend it.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.