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)."Simple to manage."
"The features we have found most valuable are the firewall and the monitoring tools."
"The cloud management system is really valuable."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"I love the simplicity of Meraki MX — specifically, the simplicity of the dashboard."
"Real Auto VPN with load balancer without needing a public IP. It is simple and functional."
"WAN optimization is the best feature of the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Meraki MX is I can manage the solution from anywhere remotely, I can throttle bandwidth, and create all rules. Additionally, it is secure for our customers."
"The product is very easy to configure."
"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."
"The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"The features that I find most valuable are the MIR (Mandiant Incident Response) for checks on our inbound security."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"The installation phase was easy."
"We see ROI in the sense that we don't have to react because it stops anything from hurting the network. We can stop it before we have a bigger mess to clean up."
"Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date."
"Could possibly use deeper configurations."
"It is very expensive."
"MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients."
"From the improvement perspective, we need more monitoring capabilities. We want to have full-based access visibility, such as, what is happening when something is trying to reach and it is denying. We cannot see some parts of it. The integration of active directory with this product is not very fruitful. It has some bugs or lacks in the functionality of active directory integration. We are unable to identify where exactly and whether it has really applied our policy."
"They're very complacent and I find the rule set to be a little arcane."
"We do not have account managers in our region for the solution. Some governments don't use the product since it is attached to the internet."
"Load balancing options and ability to manage a couple of Internet connections."
"There is a lot of room for Improvement in the offering, from cost to functionality. It is pretty straightforward to implement which is an advantage. However, it falls short in pricing, detection capabilities, and, most importantly, reporting and policy management."
"I would love to see better reporting. Because you can't export some of the reports in proper formats, it is hard to extract the data from reports."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"Cybersecurity posture has room for improvement."
"If you want to search the hashes in the environment, you need to put in IOCs one by one, making it a very hectic job."
"The world is currently shifting to AI, but FIreEye is not following suit."
"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."
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.