Trellix Endpoint Security Reviews

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. 

The package of protection that it provides is useful. It has antivirus, malware protection, VPN, and a whole bunch of other features.

It is just there in the background and does its job. Every once in a while, it reminds me that it is doing its job.

They can make it free, but that's not going to happen.

I have been using this solution for about a year. It seems to be the current version.

So far I have no issues. It is very stable, and does not tale a lot of CPU or memory resources, which was a problem in older products.

I am using it on a personal computer, so scalability is not an issue.

I have not used their support.

Its setup is very easy and straightforward.

Its price is reasonable. Setup was easy.

I would advise others to get the most comprehensive protection that they can. For me, it meant McAfee, but there are other good solutions around.

I would rate McAfee Endpoint Security an eight out of 10.

We use it for all Windows and MAC clients. We use it for endpoint protection, DLP, and disk encryption. We are using the latest version.

The endpoint protection and disk encryption features are the most valuable.

It didn't work well for some of the use cases. We have different use cases for each entity. 

Their support is also not good and needs improvement.

I have been using McAfee Endpoint Security for almost three years.

Only the endpoint is stable. There are still a few things that need to be done in DLP.

It can scale. We have around 10K users who use it on a daily basis. 

Their support is not good. It needs to be improved.

We used Symantec previously. They didn't have a suite, and I wanted a suite that can give me a single control panel to manage my endpoint protection, DLP, and disk encryption. I wanted to use only a single agent with different modules so that I don't have to worry about multiple things.

It was not that simple. I would say it was moderate. It took more than three months to stabilize.

We used a partner integrator. We maintain it on our own. 

It is not that expensive. There is no additional cost. We got the entire bundle together.

I would not recommend this solution because a lot of new-age solutions are available in the market. These solutions are better than McAfee Endpoint Security and can do a better job.

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

We receive good protection with this solution. We use this for internet protection on the end-point.

The product helps us by contacting us if there are any virus attacks on our system.

I think the prime feature is the protection from malware.

It is a very stable solution.

The scalability of this product is very good. 

Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past.

The setup was straightforward, and not complex.

When selecting a vendor, we want to make sure there is a good presence in our region, and competent partners that can give support of the solution.

The pricing is comparable to other solutions. We have no issues with the pricing of this solution.

It is all about the technical experience. Since we use this in our environment, we advise people to use this product.

The easy accessibility of managing all the agents through a central server and the customizability of the management interface are the most valuable features for us from our experience with it so far.

With this product, we can easily implement encryption for all our users in the company and deploy modules as and when needed through a central interface. This has made our job much easier.

We’ve had issues when upgrading to updated versions of the product two times already. A single sign-on functionality would be good to have in the future.

We’ve been using this for about three years now.

When we upgraded the agent deployed on our users' computers, it locked out the people who were still on the old agent, which was not supposed to happen.

We’ve also had an issue previously with one of the modules of Mcafee Endpoint encryption, DLP. This particular module, when we upgraded to the latest version ,took up all the resources on the computer, making it unusable. We had to remove this module from all the affected computers.

We have had no issues with the stability.

We have had no issues scaling it.

They didn't know why the upgrade issue was happening.

The setup is easy and straightforward. Install the agent, put the computer in the correct deployment group, and that's it.

We implemented this through our in-house team and used the vendor for support in any technical issues we might encounter.

Pilot testing is a must when upgrading any of the new modules or the McAfee agent.

The fact that the three components have been provided under one platform helps to simply perform product management.

Also, the virus definition file size is 40% smaller, which reduces the amount of bandwidth required to update all the endpoints.

There are three valuable components to Endpoint Security 10.1: First, there's threat prevention, which is for anti-virus and anti-malware detection. Second, there's firewall, which replaces the Windows firewall when activated. Third, there's web control which is used for endpoint web filtering.

The threat prevention feature is the most valuable because it provides protection against malware.

I would like the product deployment to be made simpler. The current deployment requires creating tasks to install each component.

The product is quite stable. We haven't had any issues with instability.

The scalability is great. We've been able to scale it for our needs.

Intel Security technical support is very efficient, although the wait times on the customer support line can be quite long.

I previously used Kaspersky. However, the management console does not match up to the functionality of the ePolicy orchestrator management console provided by Intel Security.

The setup was very straightforward. The EPO server deployed the McAfee agent and then we were able to deploy Endpoint Security.

Implementation was done through the vendor. My advice is to ensure all the requirements that are provided prior to implementation to avoid any delays.

The return on investment has been very encouraging. Ask the vendor to give you as much information as possible on all the suites so you can get a package that suites your environment.

Endpoint Protection 10.1 is a very complete endpoint protection solution that gives complete protection for endpoints. It is easy to deploy and can be a very useful endpoint protection suite for small, medium, and large-scale environments.