Trellix Endpoint Security Reviews

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 is to provide our customers with an endpoint security solution.

Its pricing needs to be improved.

The stability of this solution is good.

They are releasing new versions every month.

This solution is pretty scalable.

We have more than fifty users for this solution, and we plan to increase its usage.

Our experience is from the technical support in India, and it is good.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup for this solution is very easy. Anyone can learn the interface.

The deployment takes approximately half an hour, depending on the speed of the server, and depending on the nodes. I can manage one thousand nodes in one week.

The maintenance of this solution requires two or three people.

We used a partner to assist us with the implementation. It was our reseller, and they are good.

I think McAfee is the best solution. Anyone can use it, the protection is good, and they have all of the features. There is user protection at a nice speed.

There have been some improvements in the latest version. For example, when you log in to the older version it is very slow sometimes. With the newest version, it is like they removed some things.

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. 

One valuable feature is Threat Prevention with the on-demand scan. After the policy configuration is made, all our end users were happy that the computer didn’t feel slow when scanning files as the scanner just runs when the users are idle.

McAfee Endpoint Security 10.5 has improved our security and made our customers more effective. As it uses less CPU, no one needs to wait for their computer to finish any scans.

I think it would be nice if Dynamic Application Control would come together with McAfee Endpoint Security. The Dynamic Application Control works well against ransomware as well as other viruses.

We have been using the solution for about one year.

We had no issues with our customers. The 10.5 version was nice, with no stability issues or any other critical issues noticed.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

The level of technical support at McAfee is 10/10. The support is just great. Often they solve all the problems or give you advice on how you can improve the policy to work even better.

I don’t think I’ve ever spoken to any support which makes a customer happier than McAfee support. It just feels like they care about the customer.

We used VirusScan Enterprise (McAfee). It worked fine, but in the end, the CPU usage was too high when doing On-Demand scans.

I would not say that it was complex, but of course you should do some testing with the policies to reach the best performance and the best protection for your client. We used an ePO server to manage the policy, as well as the deployment, without any problems.

I would advise them to speak to our resellers at Advania, as I’m a technical consultant and not a reseller.

We did not evaluate other options. McAfee is a clear choice to make, when running an ePO server as well as other endpoint products from McAfee. They really integrate well with each other and that is a strong force within the fight against malware and ransomware attacks.

Test the product well and make your own policy changes to improve the product even more. Often McAfee can get you some test periods to try the product. Also, have a look at the Dynamic Application Control. It’s worth the value in the end.

There is not one feature in particular that is more valuable than another for us. It is generally a valuable tool that helps us with our security.

We can easily renew our subscription and update the product. When we update it, it automatically removes viruses from most of the infected systems.

They could improve it by providing better manageability for administrators. I need to spend too much time on this right now.

We've been using it for three years.

We have had an issue updating it. I have applied update ePO 5.3.1, but it shows the update version is ePO 5.3.0.

There have been no stability issues.

We have had no issues scaling it.

Customer service responds well.

Technical service is also responsive.

I used a different product in a previous position.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We implemented it via a vendor team.

The pricing needs to be lowered as we find it to be high. We're just a small-to-medium sized company.

You should use a licensed version of an anti-virus, preferably McAfee.