Trellix Endpoint Security Reviews

The most valuable features for us are:

1. Encryption of our data
2. Automatic user recovery prior to Windows booting up.

We are able to use it as our primary encryption tool so we do not have to spend resources on another product for this purpose. It is really the most useful feature as we do not have to worry about our data being compromised, which is our biggest concern.

We experienced some bad behavior when we first installed the product. The system also starts slowly in some instances. If for some reason this solution crashes, we could lose all our data.

Sometimes, we had the slowness issues upon starting up.

It was unstable when we initially installed it.

It has seemed to scale just fine for our needs.

Be aware of the time it takes to deploy it as we experienced some slow startups.

The central management feature of the ePolicy Orchestrator was extremely valuable to me. My organization had a very small security team, so the ability to manage our protection tools from one program made the job much more efficient.  Additionally, central management made it much easier to create executive reports for management review. 

My organization did not have a well-maintained host-based security program before McAfee Endpoint Protection. This product made it possible to protect critical data, investigate threat events, and prevent future events from occurring on every endpoint on our network.

One thing I could have used was a more detailed description of the HIPS signatures. When selecting a HIPS configuration, I would have liked to see exactly what access will change on the system. My organization did not have much room for testing, and many issues did not come up until days or weeks after changes were made. 

We have had no issues with the deployment.

We have had no issues with the stability.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

The system my current organization uses does not allow for administrative changes from the endpoint itself, like McAfee Endpoint Protection does. This feature is very useful when testing firewall rules and HIPS configurations for specific programs and sites that only certain network segments may need to access. 

I use certain features of the solution, although I am not using the latest version, even though my colleagues do so a lot. They also use MVISION, although I do not.

We make use of Endpoint host level data loss prevention.

The solution has some good firewall features, as well as those involving control and threat protection of the host. 

The software download features could stand improvement. This sometimes must be undertaken manually. 

The job hosting features should also be improved. 

I have been using McAfee Endpoint Security for three to four years.

The solution is reliable. 

I did not do much integration when it came to the installation of McAfee, although I did integrate with Forcepoint. 

Tech support is responsive. They're good, the very best. 

The initial setup is fine. 

People, naturally, go for a yearly license. 

I am happy with the pricing. 

The solution is primarily on-premises. 

Usage in our organization is vast. We have so many customers using the solution. 

The solution is good and we always recommend. It is perfect. 

I rate McAfee Endpoint Security as a nine out of ten. 

We like the management of the ePO, and we like the management console.

They can improve its resource consumption, such as memory, and maybe provide better or smaller updates. It always takes a lot of resources, but it has been getting better. I have been using McAfee products for the last 20 years or so, and I know it is getting better.

It should probably have some kind of consolidation. DLP is big now. Instead of installing DLP, Endpoint Antivirus, and the EDR components separately, there probably should be a consolidation of different products into one agent itself. It should maybe have more of bundling of everything.

I have been using McAfee products for the last 20 years or so. We have been using it in our company for about four years. We are also a McAfee partner.

On the Windows platform, it is good, but on my Mac, I've been experiencing some issues. I think they are linked to McAfee, but I'm still investigating.

It is basically an endpoint, but with regards to MVISION, it is very scalable. We run everything remotely from the cloud, so it is fine.

It is straightforward. We've got a lot of experience in McAfee.

I would recommend this product. It is a good product if you get all the rules right and you get the deployment right. I would advise people to make sure that they have all the rules and all the settings right before they evaluate the product because if you don't do that, the product would fail. So, you got to get everything right. You got to get everything installed and configured properly to get the best out of it.

I would rate McAfee Endpoint Security an eight out of 10 at the moment. McAfee is good. I always liked McAfee for the endpoint. They are always improving on their stuff.

• Central management with ePolicy Orchestrator
• Communication with all Mcafee products (also 3rd parties) by DXL infrastructure

We are sure that our endpoints are safe. They are protected by Mcafee.

As IT, we can monitor centrally how much the endpoints are safe and what threats are occurred.

We’re facing remote installation issues sometimes: Installation may have been broken by something and installation is corrupted. It’s so hard to uninstall or repair the installation in that case.

Two years.

None.

None.

Good.

Good.

No.

Complex. I remember there were so many steps to do.

Trend Micro and ESET.

This is not a set-it-forget-it product. I can say that at least one IT employee has to be responsible to this product.

We use the solution for security.

The DLP and user interface are the most valuable feature.

I have been using McAfee Endpoint Security for the past four months.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have approximately 500 users using the solution daily in my organization.

We did not have any issue with the need to contact technical support.

The installation was not difficult.

We use two vendors for the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

The price of the solution is in the middle range compare to others and could be reduced. There are not any additional costs.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate McAfee Endpoint Security a nine out of ten.

The thing that I like is that they have gathered almost all of the products in one management server, the ePolicy Orchestrator. Although, it is quite complicated to learn it and to feel comfortable with the environment, you have the flexibility to administer all of the programs from one console.

Regarding the DLP product, there are many flavors.

Also, I haven't seen any data leakage through the endpoint.

McAfee offers an integrated solution, and it covers almost all the possibilities of data loss.

If we go to, for example, scanning data from text to just pictures, then the loader goes really high. It might sometimes become impossible to cover all these fixes because the data that are gathered and are processed are very big, and the resources can run out.

It can be quite complicated to learn McAfee Endpoint Security and to feel comfortable with the environment.

The technical support can be improved.

I've been working with this solution for five years.

I would rate McAfee's technical support at seven on a scale from one to ten. There were some issues that we experienced.

Even though it took me one or two years to get comfortable with it, I would rate McAfee Endpoint Security at nine on a scale from one to ten. All-in-all, our customers seem to be okay with some of the restrictions and the relevant risk with McAfee Endpoint Security.

My primary use case of this solution is for the endpoint protection.

It has improved my organization because it helps with visibility, in terms of security. We can see the actual attack and can contain it. The antivirus can detect that. 

• Drive 
• DLP feature for device control

The endpoint has room for improvement because it's restrictive, it's very sensitive. Sometimes it can delete something that you need and so sometimes you have to disable the antivirus.

It's quite scalable. We have around 30 users. 

I would rate their technical support an eight out of ten. It's not a ten because I would like to see them resolve a case within the day. Sometimes it takes them a long time. 

The initial setup was not complex. The deployment took only a few minutes. We only needed one employee for the deployment. If need be, we'll require two employees for maintenance but one is usually enough. 

We used a reseller for the implementation. 

It's fairly priced compared to other products on the market.