Trellix Endpoint Security Reviews

Overall, we handle the implementation of the solution, taking into account the policy required to secure the network.

We primarily use McAfee Endpoint Security for data loss and endpoint protection.

An area in need of improvement involves the overview, which usually does not enable one to get the value in reports.

Upon receipt of the incident, the review is important. Based on this it is possible to construct a workflow for closing the case. 

It is crucial to keep the data inside the department. Receipt of the incident is a pain point since there is a need to engage one's system administrator as part of the data loss protection consent requirements and this involves sensitive information. However, nothing will be accomplished with a system administrator, only with a compliance administrator who is fully knowledgeable. 

The solution is not stable and the ecosystem enters the picture for those responsible. Each system is connected in a centralized manner to give a holistic view of one's endpoint and environment. This is how things are at present and it offers a great way of setting things up. But, it poses an issue that a person cannot translate the value of the information once the entire system is integrated into a single console. Nothing will be accomplished in the system if incidents are frequently received but with no correlation between them. There is a need for combining IP analytics with artificial intelligence in respect of these reports. 

The initial setup was complex and required too many servers.

A perpetual license is not an option with McAfee Endpoint Security or anyone else for that matter. 

The price of the solution is high in Asia, in contrast to Symantec, which gives you a 70% discount on the closing of the project. The issue at hand involves the people. McAfee did have some big clients in my country and region. However, it did not have many clients. 

The solution is deployed on-premises since it mostly involves a bank. 

Unfortunately, most clients have chosen to remove McAfee and have switched to Silence because of its ease of use. They are not interested in updates. 

I feel McAfee Endpoint Security is a good, mature product, although the price of the technology poses an issue. In Pakistan and Asia, there is a different kind of field environment than in Europe and the United States. While we cannot offer our clients managed services, which is what everyone wants, in Europe and the United States they can. 

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

It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment.

The desktop firewall is a great product. It can be set to allow only authorized applications to communicate with the internet. In this way, it can block the changes for an unknown application to access our command and control server and to receive encryption keys. It is very good at preventing crypto-malware.

Their drive encryption is perfect.

You can create a complete inventory of all available executable files on the machine and whitelist the ones that you want, then lock the machine so that nothing else can be executed.

The web filtering is quite good at the endpoint level.

The threat intelligence exchange product is great because at the moment malware is detected on one device or other devices and endpoints, our servers are informed about the threats and they will be automatically recognized.

The solution has a ton of products and great features.

ePO can now be integrated with products from other vendors such as BeyondTrust, Boldon James, Titus, and you can even control Microsoft BitLocker. The architecture is easily extended and upgraded.

The vendor should simplify the way they bundle the products because it's very hard to explain to customers what products contain which features.

This product requires Microsoft SQL Server as a database and you have to deploy it yourself, then later integrate it with the console. 

I have been using McAfee Endpoint Security since it first entered the market, which was several years ago.

This is a stable product. I have been working with their console since version 4.6 in 2011 and in cases where it stopped working, I was able to recover easily and it was repaired when the issue was solved. None of them crashed in a way that you could not recover from and fix it. The repairs were always relatively easy.

It is very scalable. We have four or five people in the office, but I have a few thousand workstations that are being protected by it. We have more than 10 ePO consoles, with some on-premises and some on the cloud.

We rarely needed to contact support from the vendor. In the situations when we needed some configuration from them, the response was always good.

We are McAfee partners, so I have used almost all of their endpoint products.

The initial setup is a little bit complicated, although this is because it has a tremendous number of features. Almost anything that you can think of can be configured.

The time required to deploy an ePO server with endpoint security depends on the number of endpoints in the environment, as well as the business processes. Some things require monitoring and observation over time, but in general, it can be set up over two or three days.

Our in-house team is responsible for the deployment, which requires one engineer on-site. We also provide support to our clients.

The pricing is great and licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis.

In general, it is a really great product and I recommend it. I don't have any objections and most of the users only use perhaps 25% of the features that are available. I cannot remember a time that I needed a feature and it wasn't available in the console.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

In terms of features, its internet exchange is also perfect. I mostly like the powerful management tools. It's got a lot of detail, so it's powerful.

They don't have any gateway solution. In the past, they did. I think they need a gateway solution to control internet traffic. In the next solution, it will improve the total security, on the network security side if they add this. 

In Turkey, according to regulations, the main platform must stay on on-prem, not on the cloud. Most of the customers are still using the mail gateway solution but McAfee stopped developing mail gateway security. For us, it's one of the missing pieces on McAfee in Turkey. They're right, they saw that mail business is going to cloud but in closed countries, we need a gateway solution. McAfee is missing this.

In the next release, they should add something that converts the endpoint business switch for the endpoints. They can integrate side endpoints and try to add them to an existing endpoint, or maybe they can match all these add-ons on a single agent. 

All McAfee products are stable at the endpoint. That only changed when Microsoft announced a new update, and we can foresee compatibility problems. Normally if McAfee gives 1-gigabyte throughput in production, you will see the performance and stability. McAfee's products generally are stable, when I see the from the production angle. Approximately all of the products are stable.

It's very easy to scale. You can deploy a conservative amount easily. If there are other branches, McAfee is the best solution for that kind of implementation. Scalability is very high. With the cloud solutions available after McAfee acquired Skyhigh, they can also offer a solution on the cloud side. On-prem and also cloud allows McAfee to be a full solution for the customers.

Generally, in Turkey, support is very good. Soon they will open a call center in Turkey with a Turkish speaker with technical knowledge. Generally, when I was on the technical side, when I called the support team, in an hour or two maximum someone would connect to the system and start to investigate. In the end, most of my problems have been solved via the technical team.

The initial setup is complex. It is a very complex product. You must have experience with it. If not, installation can be disastrous. You must have experience with it because it's not easy. But if you install it perfectly everything can then be done automatically and it's more powerful.

Everything has been simplified. On the endpoint side, there is also a lot of improvement.

When Intel acquired McAfee they worked on the protocol so that all vendors can work on the same platform. It's a very big improvement in McAfee. All McAfee products talk to each other. Other vendor's products can join this platform as well so it makes it more powerful on the enterprise side for McAfee.

With a knowledgeable technician that has a lot of experience with the product, you won't have problems. If you work with a less experienced person, implementing the solution can become a problem.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.

I find the endpoint management feature the most valuable. I like the exploit blocking, the anti-exploit.

The solution is getting better. The new central console is better than the earlier one. Earlier it was too complex to find out which option was there. So, if there was a search menu for certain things and if I wanted to enable or disable something, I couldn't. Now there's a search menu that I can type into and I can navigate through the menu to where I want to go.

There are still too many options but it is better now.

Sometimes, while installing the ePO we get many errors and I don't know why they happen. So I just want them to work on that part. So that during the implementation there will be fewer errors.

I'm not sure if McAfee supports patching. They could add vulnerability scanning as a feature. I know the setting is already there, but if they could add a feature of vulnerability scanning and patching that would be great.

Technical support is very good. I'll say in the Middle East, I don't know about other divisions, but in the Middle East, it's good. If I have a ticket they follow up and give a call. I don't know where support is set up for the Middle East, if it's in the area, but those guys are very nice.

I would like to recommend the solution. It's better, and pricing wise, it's worth it. It's really worth it as compared to other advanced malware security solutions in the market. They are costly, like anything. And the technical support good, even though the solution is new. The solution is not yet mature. Pricing is fairly affordable for all enterprises, big or small. 

I would rate this solution an 8.5 out of 10. Because sometimes it makes machines really slow. There are a lot of features. I enabled all the layers but it sometimes makes systems slow. The solution keeps on adding engines and engines. If they can add everything in one engine instead of having multiple engines, then I would really say the system would work faster. I'd say it's not that bad, but it's not that good. The speed is still better than other versions in the past that came out.

I am using McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection to control bandwidth. Any network administrator can do that easily. Control is the best part of Mcafee.

I need to be able to allow the amount of data used on an authorized user account., i.e. the amount of web data someone uses before a limit. I use other tools for that now.

The most valuable features are the adaptive tech on McAfee.

In our experience, McAfee Endpoint Protection could improve the word control feature. It is absent from the application. I couldn't do that.

Everything has been fine with the product. It could use better visuals. The tutorial is very limited. They need better training materials and visuals in reports.

McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is very stable. 

I don't know how much it can grow. Already you have the basic products that you need for the platform. We have about say 500 endusers and admins altogether. There are around ten admins for the solution.

I had an issue. I had a bridge about a year and a half ago. I had to contact McAfee online and they helped me patch it. They signed the consolation code for us.

I had a very good experience with McAfee customer support. I'm very satisfied.

When I came in, there was a previous manager. He set it up. I had nothing to do with it.

I would recommend McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection. It's an all in one endpoint. You can scale it. You can buy McAfee web control. You can buy other products.

You can increase as many products as you like as you go on. Most organizations don't have it and it makes controlling easier.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection a solid seven because a ten is perfect. I believe there are opportunities for improvement.

The central management solution by far.

There can be like a religious war between the large antivirus systems, but I do think that all of the larger competitors deliver good antivirus solutions.

The thing that separates them is:
- The way they are managed.
- The way they adapt to new threats.
- The products around the product that give you a higher value.

Every time I have installed this at a customer site they are most impressed by the central management, reporting, and options to do more.

Improvements are made all the time as the threats change.
I think the improvements on speed are the most important after actually finding the threats.

I have used this or the predecessor to this since 2002.

The polices and rules take time if you don’t know the product.
This is not unique to McAfee and it's not really an issue.

Not really with the antivirus part, but the application firewall and encryption can make functions stop working if not tested vastly before deployment.

No

10/10

10/10 (maybe not tier 1 but every one after)

I have used F-Secure, Symantec, Kaspersky Lab and Trend Micro.

It's all about planning and testing.
ePO can be complex but the antivirus is not that complex.

I am a consultant.

I have used F-Secure, Symantec, Kaspersky Lab and Trend Micro.

I think that in the enterprise space, this is by far the best solution and not because the actual antivirus. It's because of ePO.

McAfee Endpoint Protection is a a good product that's easy to administer. It provides endpoint protection for desktops, laptops, and servers, and the protection includes anti-virus, anti-malware, anti-spam, DLP, and encryption.

We're less affected by viruses and threats on end-user device, able to manage all endpoints from a centralized server across locations. We're also able to encrypt sensitive laptops with ease. Very good reporting and compliance to endpoints.

It needs much better control on zero-day viruses and easier submission of threats to McAfee. They also need to improve the DLP rules since loads of false positives and patch releases are not quick enough when a new OS hits the market. Because of this, there are incompatibility issues which cause slowness on end-user devices.

I've used it for five years.

Deployment of agents and products to end-user machines is straightforward and easy. The basic McAfee ePO deployment is not easy and you need good knowledge in SQL and servers.

Patch release is not fast when there is a new OS on the market, so compatibility issues will come and can cause slowness on end-user devices. For example, I had a tough time when Windows 10 was released and the devices were not protected for a month, which is not advisable.

The upgrade of the new ePO from older versions always have issues and need support from McAfee engineers all the time. In a span of three years, we had upgraded three times and all three times were difficult. But the engineers were good enough and at the end of the day, they fixed it.

We had no issues with the stability.

We had no issues with the scalability.

Excellent 8.5/10

9/10 - Very fast support and engineers have good knowledge of the products. They show patience in understanding the issues before taking any action/recommendations, which I personally appreciate. They also have an escalation matrix that provides for faster response time depending on issue severity.

I have used Symantec, not happy with their support and was facing lots of performance issues.

The initial setup is complex as loads of communication (ports between server, clients and locations) has to be done, making setup difficult. You need a good engineer who has knowledge of SQL, database, servers, and firewalls.

Our environment was a mix. I prefer to do it with a vendor and Intel Support.

The pricing was good and licensing is on a per-user basis, so it's flexible. All the products will work, but only AV signatures will stop downloading.

We evaluated Kaspersky and Trend Micro.

Always test on all environments and different OS's before deploying into production, especially VSE, DLP, and encryption.

We use the solution as a server and workstation.

The solution provides dashboard control, so we can centrally monitor the entire status of our organization. This is very good.

While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall. 

We have been using McAfee Endpoint Security for at least five years. 

The solution is stable. As evidence, we have been using it for upwards of five years. 

The scalability is good. 

We receive local technical support and this is networked, which allows them to to open a ticket for us. 

The initial setup is easy.

I cannot comment on the price, since we have a separate team that handles this issue. 

There are 2500 users in our organization who utilize the solution. 

I would recommend the solution to others.

I rate McAfee Endpoint Security as an eight out of ten.