Cofense Triage accelerates phishing qualification, investigation, and response by automating standard responses to suspicious emails to make analysts more efficient and driving out actionable intelligence, and providing incident response playbook.
N/A
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
ThreatDown (formerly Malwarebytes for Business), combines Malwarebytes' endpoint security capabilities in four bundles. The basic Core tier includes incident response, Next-gen AV, device control, vulnerability assessments, and the ability to block unwanted application.
$345
per year 5 endpoints (minimum)
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
The Trend Vision One Endpoint Security platform provides antivirus and malware detection, and endpoint visibility. The product suite can be extended with associated applications that cover mobile endpoint protection, endpoint encryption, as well as network and server vulnerability protection.
Trend Micro Vision One - License - 51-250 Users - New Subscription
$35.99
12 month subscription
Trend Micro Vision One Endpoint Security Pro - subscription license - 1 device
$178.99
12 month subscription
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cofense Triage
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Optional Add-Ons include server and mobile device protection. Server protection ranges from $129 to $179 per annum depending on service tier. Mobile security is $10 per device, no matter the service tier. A 10% discount is offered for choosing a two-year billing plan.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cofense Triage
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
Considered Multiple Products
Cofense Triage
No answer on this topic
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Verified User
Director
Chose ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
We used some of the other products as our endpoint protection and they were not up to today's threats. Malwarebytes found threats the others let in from the 1st day we used it. We knew right then we had made the right choice.
The tool is very helpful in improving Phishing detection capabilities as it streamlines the process of analyzing user reports a lot. Besides it has a built-in mechanism of rating reporters(end-users) based on their historical performance. Downside - tool requires continuous resource investment to deliver best result. Tool is not helping too much in improving user-education, because automated response process is not immediate and is prone to errors
I think Malwarebytes is the best anti-malware company. I think it is well-suited for any situation and any device. I think Malwarebytes does the best on Windows and on MacOS. Also, Malwarebytes is always improving, and you can tell they are a company that stays on top of cybersecurity trends. If you have a tight budget or looking for the cheapest solution, then Malwarebytes may not be the solution for you. To clarify, I don't think Malwarebytes is that much more expensive compared to its closest competitors.
Before Trend Micro OfficeScan we used Symantec Endpoint Protection and although it was very easy to deploy and to update agents it couldn't find a virus if you pointed it out with a neon sign. We were always getting hit with different viruses but since we migrated to Trend we no longer have that problem. Trend has definitely been preventing those kind of outbreaks successfully.
Protects against malware - No matter how much training you give end users on social hacking, there is always a breach at some point.
Protects against ransomware - Ransomware could spell disaster for a company...it could literally shut the doors for good.
Centralized administration - Without a terrific centralized method to manage all the systems being protected, it would require an extra position just to maintain all endpoints.
The product has two important aspects, centralized console and an agent which is typically installed on every machine. When the product is installed on a dedicated server then all computers can readily get updated while in the same network (provided the agent is installed on every machine). This helps the machine to avoid any kind of virus attacks.
Even if the machines are not in the same network where the console is being run it can directly get all updates from the Trend Micro server directly and the machine is still protected. Hence, it is not necessary that users have to visit the office or internal network to get the update, once the agent is installed on the machine then they can get the update from anywhere as long as the machine has access to the Internet.
Once the agent is installed on the machine the users can themselves do a full scan and even check the logs themselves.
Only thing I would have to say that's negative is the reporting aspect. Basic reporting is good but still lacks some details. This is a problem with many of the software vendors I have encountered in the past as well. Reporting is still much better than most.
When I first used the tool in my home systems MANY years ago, I wished for a Business version. I was once at a focus group for a major antivirus company, and one attendee’s feedback to “what could we do better?” was “buy out MalwareBytes and add it to your tool”. I’ve used the Business version since it first became available, and have continued to be a dedicated user through the many iterations and improvements
It is very easy to stick with a vendor year after year, and it is also easy to see the faults in a product and want to change. This is the first time I have renewed with an antiviurs provider as others have been less than ideal and caused issues where there were none before, so while it isn't perfect, it is the best of the bunch currently and I am hopeful that it will continue to improve in future versions.
It simply works. It doesn't require the hand-holding and monitoring that some other solutions do. It's simple to deploy and maintain, and adding custom content such as Exceptions require minimal effort. I’ve had to add a few exceptions for internal-use, in-house-developed tools, but it’s quite simple to do so within the online interface
The dashboard is user-friendly and allows for an IT admin to quickly deploy the software. The users do not even notice the program running in the background. From the dashboard the IT department can monitor all the workstations for issues and maintain good health of the network.
As I mentioned, we have only email support. Their phone support was very expensive. If we ever have any issues, we have to email them and wait for their response. In most cases, I have figured out the issue on my own. The software is very stable so we haven't used their support much.
It has been difficult at sometimes, the support people at one point told me that they couldn't tell me information about OfficeScan because it was knowledge that was passed down from engineer to engineer. The issue was that if you used the msi for the install any further installs would require the msi to have the same exact name or else the install fails and corrupts the install. This information is not listed anywhere on trends website. Support kept trying to get me to use the exe for installs instead, but we use SCCM and msi's work better. We had to write a script to come up with a solution so that we could uninstall the software and install the new software. Trend did provide the technical expertise to help with the script and had us work with one of the developers in order to resolve that issue. So they did fix their screw up but it took a while and several complaints.
I first implemented this more than 10 years ago, when it required an in-site setup with SQL Server (or SQL Express), and even that was pretty easy. With the move to centralized web management some treats ago, it’s become even easier to deploy
The other product had a lot of fails on the auto-processing and did not integrate well with our current environment. One issue had to do with the way it sends the submissions to its processing engine—our email gateway configuration would have blocked this traffic. I also did not like the user interface.
It's no contest. Cisco AMP, Umbrella and Endpoint use vast amounts of resources and provide little protection when compared with Malwarebytes. One client recently replaced Cisco with MWB and found over 7,300 vulnerabilities on 352 endpoints, including 120 listed as Critical and 7,180 listed as High, with CVE's dating back to 2008.
For me, Trend Micro Apex One with its low performance is the best option at the time to buy a solution like this, with its flexibility through on-premises or saas deployment options you can choose the option that best fix to you, has an advanced automated threat detection and response against an ever-growing variety of threats.
Due to the integration potential, large amounts of time are saved on a daily basis.
Incident response time has dropped due to the increased information available by having access to phishing emails directly.
Staff are able to effectively learn how multiple tools in our environment are used by mastering Triage. This has decreased training time greatly and increased the effectiveness of each associate.
The ease of remediation has saved our IT team a number of hours manually installing, for example, the free version of Malwarebytes to remove infections, and then cleaning the machine up. Being able to centrally send commands to clean the device is much more efficient.
The centralised management has also alerted us to infections on machines that we might not otherwise have known about, as the existing AV had not detected them, saving us potential data loss, or system damage.
Since the product is a full suite of protection rolled into a single product, we've seen ROI through cost reduction and simplified management. And while we haven't measured performance, one would logically assume that systems will perform better with a single product installed vs several.
While we haven't measured performance, one would logically assume that systems will perform better with a single product installed vs several.
