ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes vs. Trellix Endpoint Security ENS

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.

Incentivized

It provides great web security and will protect your devices against viruses and malware when paired with other security software and hardware. For instance, we have multiple layers of security set up so if McAfee misses something then one of our other barriers will catch the infection or intrusion before it reaches the network. I would not suggest using this product as a standalone agent because I do not think it will be as effective when working by itself. The dashboard also makes it convenient to manage devices, policies, and settings from wherever you are so it's an ideal solution for any IT department to use. I would just suggest using something else as a backup so your network isn't left vulnerable.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• Provides high fidelity alerting.
• Allows CSOC analysts to perform forensic triage and alert investigations through containment from a single pane of glass.
• Provides alert telemetry across on-disk and in-memory attacks.
• Supports many additional 'bolt-on' modules to provide additional alert context or capabilities.

Incentivized

• When you push install to clients, sometimes it will fail with generic errors, and it's hard to find out what is the cause of failure. Fortunately, it doesn't require too many changes on the client-side but it takes time to figure it out.
• When we bought it, we had an option to buy it with email support or phone support. The phone support was very high priced, so we ended up buying email support. when we experience any issues, it takes a long time to get a resolution. Fortunately, we haven't used their support much.
• It had a few incidents with false calls. We are using software that generates reports in MS Word format. The software will call Word to open with a report, but the anti-exploit will consider this as a threat and will block the function. You can put Word in an exception but it won't protect Word from a real exploit in the future.

Incentivized

• The amount of false detections especially the negative ones needed to be reduced.
• It requires more optimization. It tends to make the PCs slower.
• It almost doesn't have the ability to heal. This is very important as we need our sensitive data to be recoverable.
• It doesn't have any free scanning functionality. Our users using personal machines cannot scan in case of an incident. This could be added like Malwarebytes.

Incentivized

The renewal decision is not up to me and also, the current economic situation might not allow renewal

Incentivized

The software is very easy to manage. In 4 years, we hardly have experienced any issues. It simply works.

Incentivized

Whenever I've had a query for the support team, they have got back to me very quickly, and given me very well detailed advice on fixing whatever the issue I had was. They also pointed me to help documents and such where I could find more information if I needed

Incentivized

The support of product was very good when we initially implemented the solution. We were getting fats replies and could see the customer approach. After a while the level of support was not following the SLA's and the replies were getting very confusing and late.

Incentivized

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.

Unlike Trellix Endpoint Security Symantec Endpoint provides less information about events on the user side. Trellix give an opportunity to see information about virus detection on a user machine as quick as it possible, so we were able to catch the signs of virus propagation early and prevent the spread of damage

Incentivized

• Malwarebytes Endpoint Protection has had a HUGE positive impact on our ROI as we eliminated the need for an entire server, CALs & other licenses as well.
• We are saving a lot of time on the management side of Malwarebytes Endpoint Protection as compared to others as it is cloud based and we are able to manage it from everywhere and not just one server. This has improved our performance and reduced expenses as well.

Incentivized

• From an auditing standpoint, we can show that our workstations/servers are protected.
• Even though it cant identify more advanced/targeted malware, it is still good to identify the more obvious malware which occurs daily in my enterprise.
• Since it can be easily deployed, the products can easily get deployed on all systems in the environment for optimal anti-malware protection.

Incentivized