We performed a comparison between Symantec Advanced Threat Protection 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."The Application Control code and the easy integration are valuable features."
"It has certainly helped out our audit efforts because we each stay compliant in terms of various security standards."
"You don't have to buy a separate email security platform. You can enable that using their endpoint, and I like that. You don't have to have two agents running on the same box."
"Real-time threat analysis is quick and takes action on threats immediately."
"What I like most about Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is its notification capability."
"Endpoint to network protects the line."
"All of the solution's features are quite valuable for us. We especially like the threat protection it provides."
"The incident management on the solution is very good. You get a lot of detailed information about an incident. You also get a lot of documentation in connection with the CVI or integration."
"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."
"The installation phase was easy."
"The sandbox feature of FireEye Network Security is very good. The operating system itself has many features and it supports our design."
"Improved our systems and our customers' by providing better malware protection, defense against zero-day threats, and improved network security."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"Support is very helpful and responsive."
"The server appliance is good."
"Not ideal for advanced threat protection."
"The cloud platform needs to have improvement in terms of the user interface and the different capabilities it has available. It needs to match the other leading next-gen EDR products that are available in the market. That's the reason why we are stepping away from Symantec. Their cloud environment is just generally lacking in comparison to others."
"There are limits with respect to blocking files by hash value or blocking IP addresses, and these limits should be removed."
"There are some features that would add value to this product. One of them would be a graphical presentation of threats that the system has encountered."
"It also needs network-based threat protection for shared folders and files."
"The administration interface needs a lot of improvement. It should be UI based, and simple. They need to improve it. It's pretty much not that friendly compared to what we were using as Bitdefender before. It's okay but is improving, actually."
"An improvement could be made on the reporting because then it would be easier to collect information and submit it for compliance."
"The security features need to be improved."
"FireEye Network Security should have better integration with other vendors' firewalls or proxies, such as Palo Alto and Fortinet. Files that are being submitted should happen through the API or automatically."
"I heard that FireEye recently was hacked, and a lot of things were revealed. We would like FireEye to be more secure as an organization. FireEye has to be more protective because it is one of the most critical devices that we are using in our environment. They have a concept called SSL decryption, but that is only the packet address. We would like FireEye to also do a lot of decryption inside the packet. Currently, FireEye only does encryption and decryption of the header, but we would like them to do encryption and decryption of the entire packet."
"It is an expensive solution."
"I would love to see better reporting. Because you can't export some of the reports in proper formats, it is hard to extract the data from reports."
"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."
"The initial setup was complex because of the nature of our environment. When it comes to the type of applications and functions which we were looking at in terms of identifying malicious threats, there would be some level of complexity, if we were doing it right."
"The product's integration capabilities are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"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."
More Symantec Advanced Threat Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is ranked 20th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 14 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 37 reviews. Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is rated 7.8, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Symantec Advanced Threat Protection writes "Provides end-to-end antivirus protection and has good stability ". 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". Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Check Point SandBlast Network, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Arbor DDoS, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate and Netgate pfSense. See our Symantec Advanced Threat Protection 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.
