We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Software Technologies, Cisco, Sophos and others in Unified Threat Management (UTM)."The initial setup for me was straightforward."
"I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well."
"Traffic Shaping: The device lets you decide how you want to use your internet services. Due to the fact that Meraki can accept dual WAN, you can decide the way you balance the data traffic."
"WAN optimization is the best feature of the solution."
"Real Auto VPN with load balancer without needing a public IP. It is simple and functional."
"It's flexible, easy to configure, and easy to manage."
"Point-to-point VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs."
"Managed centrally over the web: You can manages all your Meraki devices in a single account."
"Its ability to find zero-day threats, malware and anything malicious has greatly improved my customer's organization, especially for protecting the users' browser."
"The features that I find most valuable are the MIR (Mandiant Incident Response) for checks on our inbound security."
"The scalability has not been a problem. We have deployed the product in very high bandwidth networks. We have never had a problem with the FireEye product causing latency issues within our networks."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from how it allows users to do the investigation part. Another important part of the product that is valuable is associated with how it gives information to users in the form of a storyline."
"Over the thirteen years of using the product, we have not experienced a single compromise in our environment. During the COVID period, we faced numerous DDoS attacks, and the tool proved highly effective in mitigating these threats."
"The product is very easy to configure."
"Pricing is an area where the solution lacks since it is an expensive tool."
"We have been having a problem with the VPN. When the energy goes down and is back again, the VPN link doesn't get established. We have to manually turn off the modems and other pieces of equipment and manually establish the VPN. It has been around one month since we have been having this problem, and we don't have enough support from Meraki to solve the problem."
"The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection."
"The only stability issue is in Content Filtering. Sometimes we need to report these types of issues to Cisco support."
"The product is quite complex to set up."
"Load balancing options and ability to manage a couple of Internet connections."
"You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."
"You cannot use switching behaviors as you see on the Meraki switch."
"Technical packaging could be improved."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
"They can maybe consider supporting some compliance standards. When we are configuring rules and policies, it can guide whether they are compliant with a particular compliance authority. In addition, if I have configured some rules that have not been used, it should give a report saying that these rules have not been used in the last three months or six months so that I disable or delete those rules."
"The initial setup was complex because of the nature of our environment. When it comes to the type of applications and functions which we were looking at in terms of identifying malicious threats, there would be some level of complexity, if we were doing it right."
"FireEye Network Security should have better integration with other vendors' firewalls or proxies, such as Palo Alto and Fortinet. Files that are being submitted should happen through the API or automatically."
"The analytics could be better. It seems heavily influenced by the McAfee and FireEye integration, and that integration still isn't seamless."
"Certain features in Trellix Network Detection and Response, such as using AL-type commands, may initially pose a challenge for those unfamiliar with such commands. However, once users become accustomed to the system, it becomes easier to use."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 59 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 37 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one". Meraki MX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG and SonicWall TZ, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Fortinet FortiGate, Zscaler Internet Access and Vectra AI.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
