We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiSandbox and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."You have access to a report as to what behaviors the example file entered in the registry."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that the performance it offers to users is good, making it useful for us in our company."
"The dynamic behavior analysis is excellent. We have many attacks caught by the FortiSandbox as zero-day attacks. Additionally, the administration is simple and can be customized to fit your companies needs."
"The main benefit of Fortinet FortiSandbox is that it allows organizations to detect and prevent unknown threats from entering an infrastructure."
"The technical support is very good."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiSandbox are customization, ICAP protocol, and integration with other vendors. Additionally, the security work very well."
"The most valuable feature is the protection and the way it works, the technology is what I like the most."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"The server appliance is good."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"The features that I find most valuable are the MIR (Mandiant Incident Response) for checks on our inbound security."
"Application categorization is the most valuable feature for us. Application filtering is very interesting because other products don't give you full application filtering capabilities."
"The solution can scale."
"The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money."
"The installation phase was easy."
"Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening."
"Not practical for real-time web traffic analysis because users won't wait for the FortiSandbox to complete its analysis before accessing content"
"The product is good but it could be speedier. In addition, it's quite complex."
"The initial setup is not too complex but could be easier."
"For the MSSPs, it would be great if the product could display all the threat chains on a dashboard since it is an area where the tool is currently lacking."
"In the next release, I would like to see machine learning and anti-exploitation included."
"If you were to compare prices between vendors and manufacturers, you would see that the lowest equipment in the Sandbox line is quite expensive for a new customer."
"I would like to have machine learning added to the solution in a future release."
"When you reach the maximum capacity, you cannot upgrade the solution because its hardware is very expensive."
"It is an expensive solution."
"It would be great if we could create granular reports based on the protocols, types of attacks, regions of attack, etc. Also we would like to easily be able to add exceptions to rules in cases of false positives."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
"If you want to search the hashes in the environment, you need to put in IOCs one by one, making it a very hectic job."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
"The world is currently shifting to AI, but FIreEye is not following suit."
"The product's integration capabilities are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiSandbox is ranked 4th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 36 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 37 reviews. Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.2, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSandbox writes "Light and powerful solution design; useful to have". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one". Fortinet FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Check Point SandBlast Network, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Fortinet FortiEDR and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate, Vectra AI and NetWitness Platform. See our Fortinet FortiSandbox vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.