Trellix Cloud Workload Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security ENS

Suitable scenario: The McAfee Cloud Workload Security console has helped me a lot in saving physical resources. We no longer have to have a server and spend resources to maintain the console, everything is in the cloud. Unsuitable scenario: After the change to the cloud the McAfee Cloud Workload Security reduced many things that were made very easy when it was on a physical server. Active directory server integration with the console is a bit tricky. That should be improved and be somewhat more friendly when connecting to be able to migrate user machines.

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

• Monitoring of detected threats
• Checking the status of antivirus agents
• Monitoring of antivirus software installed

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

• Improve integration with windows server active directory.
• The monitoring of the implementation of missing components of the antivirus should be improved.

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

So below is my breakdown, Pro's: Centralized Management, Comprehensive Protection and customization. Con's: Initial cost

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

We use McAfee Endpoint Security on user PCs and I must say that it is an excellent antivirus. The alerts we have had have been resolved without any problem. I totally recommend it.

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

• Improved resource savings in terms of physical infrastructure.

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