Trellix Endpoint Security Reviews

McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is mature, tested, and usual: this is our policy. We don't go for the latest releases. We go for the release which is before the last.

We have approximately 800 people using McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection. These are mainly end-users.

The feature I like the most in McAfee Endpoint Protection is when I get reports of unmanaged devices. These are kind of issues that alert me to address a problem. 

I need to find out how we can eliminate these devices which are connected to our network and not managed by McAfee.

In my experience, the main part of McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection that needs to be improved or simplified to make the platform better is the scanning features. 

Sometimes when it runs in the background of the endpoint, the devices get slowed down for some software applications.

The reporting should be used to enhance our analysis. There are some dashboards for user management. There is still improvement required with them.

McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is stable. We don't have any bugs being reported.

For the scalability of McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, it is easy to add more processes or add more users to the platform.

The solution's technical support is satisfactory, but there are some hiccups. Sometimes it is required to escalate to the second level. That was only one incident. 

So far, we are getting the expected customer support that we needed from McAfee.

McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is the only endpoint solution we've used.

We have not seen a return on investment. We don't do this kind of exercise to see a return on investment. Since it is working and there are not any security issues, we are safe. 

This is what we consider our return on investment for McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection.

We recommend McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection. We watch threat reports for McAfee and search Gartner's Reports to see whether they are doing well or not.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the platform an eight. We were expecting more. They need to enhance the dashboard and scanning features.

Our primary use case is for endpoint protection.

It has been protecting us for many years. And, we hope it will continue to do so for many years to come.

I think they have fantastic product but still kind of in the very early stages at the moment. Because they're just changing from the modular version, where they have a antivirus version and they have a spyware module. They have a different module, although it's managed by a single management console to now single-module called endpoint protection. But still, behind the scenes it seems to be a different product, different traits, with different capabilities and speed. Although they have increased the complexity, it has affected the scanning speed.

They're good. We certainly haven't hit the maximum. We are less than 200 employees at our site, but I believe they can scale up to about 1,000+ or even bigger. So, for us, I don't have an issue.

Initial setup was a bit complex because we had not used this product before. So, we had a learning curve of how to understand, manage, how to deploy the product and how to keep updating. Once we understood it, the product was easy to use for our needs.

It is really important for us to consider:

Product Maturity

Cost

My experience with McAfee is very good. They give excellent support, they are proactive to solve issues, and willing to integrate their products. Their ability to execute is very high.

Their malware detection rate is excellent for all type of devices and the anti-theft products are good and easy to use.

All the devices are controlled from one place. This gives great, easy management of security for different device vendors with a unique interface and, best of all, with a unique method.

Valuable features for us include the quality of their anti-malware detection: one interface for all devices. McAfee GW Security is also good.

In general, all the branches were very happy with them for three reasons:

• The product is good
• The product is well known
• Their marketing support is excellent

The product is evolving to give a global security solution, engaging all devices and products together under one interface. McAfee GW Security will be a game changer here.

McAfee GW Security and McAfee Child Safety need some improvement as they are relatively new.

We have been using the solution for five years. I have broad experience with McAfee’s complete endpoint protection, McAfee Child Safety, and their new McAfee GW Security protection that incorporates protection directly in the Home/SOHO Internet GateWay.

I worked as the product manager with these products at my former company's Global Security Vertical, giving service to all of our company's branches around the world.

We have experienced very high stability.

We have not encountered any issues with scalability.

The technical support is excellent.

We previously used Norton, Kaspersky, and Panda. From my point of view, the basic functionality is similar, but McAfee has a more innovative roadmap.

The initial setup was very easy.

The initial price is very good as they give good initial discounts, but it seems a little expensive once you renew the license. The price isn't very different comparing it with other Anti virus providers but it's worth it. With respect to freemium solutions, premium gives support and I personally prefer to pay for a service as no one gives anything for free.

We evaluated Norton, Kaspersky, Panda, and many others.

Even though it is a little expensive, the price is worth it. They come up with a complete home security eco-system that will unify the security under one easy interface.

Going to their new product, McAfee GW Security, security in the Internet GateWay, McAfee is clearly on the right track.

I was responsible for the introduction of this new type of products in my former company. I evaluated many brands (about ten), new startups, and traditional big security vendors. In my opinion, they have the clearest view of what has to be done now, (in the GW and in the Cloud), and what will be done in the future.

Some startups have good innovative products, but for sure lack the ability to execute that big vendors have. Big vendors have better malware detection rates, faster response to issues, etc.

Considering the exponential growth of Home IoT (most don’t have security), McAfee GW Security is, and will be, essential to stop hacking.

We are using  McAfee Endpoint Security to protect the business.

McAfee Endpoint Security is easy to use, and it integrates well.

The performance is good.

The security of this solution needs improvement.

I have been using McAfee for a couple of years.

I believe that we are using the latest version.

McAfee Endpoint Security is a stable solution. We don't have any issues with the stability of this product.

I don't have the exact count, but we have thousands of users in our organization who use  McAfee Endpoint Security.

I have not contacted technical support.

I was not involved in the installation of McAfee Endpoint Security.

Licensing is paid yearly.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

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

We use this solution for endpoint protection, CASB, and it is integrated with Office 365.

The most valuable feature is ease of use.

The dashboard is quite good.

I would like to see more integration with third-party products.

Pricing is always something that can be improved.

In the future, this product should make use of artificial intelligence and machine learning technology.

We have been using McAfee Endpoint Security for more than 10 years.

The stability is good and we haven't had any issues.

Scalability-wise, McAfee is a good product.

The technical support from McAfee is about average.

We use Symantec as well as McAfee for endpoint protection.

We have found that McAfee has better coverage when compared to Symantec.

The price of McAfee is pretty similar to Symantec, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

In summary, this is a good product and they have most aspects covered. That said, it needs better integration with third-party products. Even the integration with other McAfee products can be improved further.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for it to attack malware. 

The loss prevention feature would be the most valuable. This is a good feature but don't use it because of the complexity. 

We have a lot of problems with the user experience and it's difficult to implement. MacAfee's better than the ancient anti-virus solutions but it's a little slow to resolve. Many files with malware were destroyed through the network, and MacAfee doesn't detect anything.

They should improve the time of response, the time of the detection of malware, and the installation of the service.

The features we would want a good endpoint solution to contain are: 

• Multi-operative system
• Better performance
• Integration with browsers
• Firewall control 
• Vulnerability detections
• Threat protections
• Malware detection
• Detection of patterns of behavior
• Process exception
• Automatic authorizations
• Control of application reliable
• The quarantine of a compromised device

Stability is good, but not the best. 

The technical features and price are important for us when choosing a solution. 

The initial setup was complex. 

I would rate this solution a seven over ten. It's not a ten because of the time it takes to detect an issue, technical support and because I have no control with the partner. I know that the office that manages the contract has had some problems because of the reports.

The reporting capabilities are a valuable feature. This enables more visibility on our network.

The DAC (Dynamic Application Containment) component of this product needs improvement.

It is a stable solution. 

It is easy to manage, and there is an awareness of being able to scale out. 

I have not used tech support for this solution. 

The initial setup was very straightforward. 

This product is costly.

For me, the most important criteria in choosing a solution is the performance. I must seriously consider whether the solution is able to adapt to the environment. 

We primarily use this solution for antivirus and malware protection. 

You can integrate this endpoint protection with a specific business process that you may want to link to the process of the antivirus. It has the capability to custom define user-defined fields. 

One of the drawbacks to the solution is that it is not 100% secure. Sometimes it fails. Another thing we have noticed is that it is not easy to get all of the navigation information from a user. There is definitely room for improvement.

The stability is 80-90%. It is fine.

It has all of the architecture of the solution, for distribution points that will allow you to manage the network traffic. It allows you to find different routes based on actual distributed servers or endpoints. 

We have a very skilled tech support technologist who helps us with our inquiries.

It was not really complex, but, there are many ways to customize this solution. This customization takes some time.