Norton vs. Trellix Endpoint Security ENS

For a stand-alone business this should do the trick, but if using across multiple clients (multi-tenancy not an option). Default settings within the program will cause performance issues if not tweaked, meaning someone with networking experience may be necessary. Not ideal for MSP's unless they only have a few clients, as the manageability must be done within "the walls" of each company.

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

• Norton works quite quickly and is efficient enough to detect threats
• It is very easy and simple to install and is without any complications and irrelevant inquiries.
• Norton is available at a very reasonable price in the market and is not heavy on pocket.

• 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

• Cost could be an issue. They could perform a free trial at the beginning for people to check.
• It would be good if you can do an online free check of your computer.
• While the updates are good sometimes your computer is attacked by a virus they did not expect.

• 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

I did renew it before because support is great and cost is great. I believe that Norton has a very long experience in what they do and they are doing a great job with all the updates they provide and the work they are doing. Moreover Norton is going in the right direction for sure.

Well organised interface.

Incentivized

Security software with very good features that works in the background.

Price suitable for companies of any size and easy to install and use.

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

Would like a manual or online version that is simple to understand and explains in detail what choices we have and why to make these choices.

Incentivized

User-friendly interface (it's not just AV and users who were interacting with the product), performance, resource usage (most of the computers were not very fresh and that factor was very critical), efficiency, it shouldn't be just sitting on a PC - it should protect it, what was perfectly done with that product.

Incentivized

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

• Poor performance against Spyware and other threats despite claiming to act against them (recognizes very few and eliminates less) It is limited to viruses.
• Regular blocking of incoming scripts (in front of other antivirus)
• Little or almost no compatibility with the Windows XP Firewall, but they are involved.

• 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