Item: Trellix Endpoint Security ENS
Rating: 8
Author: Ralf Richter

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

McAfee Endpoint Security was used in a combination for a central managed of our clients. McAfee did enable and check Bitdefender and Virus for the client was made by McAfee. An EPO server was in place for upgrading the clients with pattern and software. The solution is in place at our managed service clients for customers and was in place for our own clients, till we moved to Cisco AMP.

Pros and Cons

Good central management.
Very stable with the clients.

Slows down the client a little bit.
Additional software needed, while Cisco AMP is already installed and licensed.

Return on Investment

Dependence on the whole installation at the client with all software.
Cisco customer not needed in parallel.
Good bandwidth needed for updates globally.

Alternatives Considered

Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) for Endpoints

If you have Cisco tools and equipment globally in place and just for the clients additionally McAfee you should have a deeper look. We wanted to install end-2-end security over all networks and hardware. This was a big point for Cisco. For a managed client team, Cisco is a step which they do not want in the first round.

Other Software Used

Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) for Endpoints, Cisco Umbrella

Likelihood to Recommend

If you deliver managed clients globally to your customer, the EPO-Server is a good tool for managing them.
The reports are very transparent and easy to present to clients. Harddisk encryption can be managed by the software, too. This is a step forward in security, too. The special thing is when using Cisco tools, e.g. AMP or Umbrella. In this scenario, McAfee additionally makes no sense.

McAfee in parallel to Cisco AMP & Umbrella, or not

Overall Satisfaction with Trellix Endpoint Security