We performed a comparison between McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has basic out-of-the-box integrations with multiple log sources."
"The analytics has a lot of advantages because there are 300 default use cases for rules and we can modify them per our environment. We can create other rules as well. Analytics is a useful feature."
"Free ingestion for Azure logs (with E5 licence)"
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"The solution has features that helped improve the security posture of our clients. It provides the ability to correlate a large variety of log sources very cost-effectively, especially for Microsoft sources."
"The AI and ML of Azure Sentinel are valuable. We can use machine learning models at the tenant level and within Office 365 and Microsoft stack. We don't need to depend upon any other connectors. It automatically provisions the native Microsoft products."
"The machine learning and artificial intelligence on offer are great."
"Mainly, this is a cloud-native product. So, there are zero concerns about managing the whole infrastructure on-premises."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator has a built-in advanced pattern, which is very useful because it can detect any pattern."
"You have to have some experience, however, it's pretty simple to understand."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator's performance is good."
"The solution's best part is that it is very easy to manage McAfee Agent."
"We get fewer false positives than with other solutions."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the antivirus and the DLP."
"I really like the auditing component because it really looks at exactly what has happened on the network."
"The graphical interface of the solution is its most valuable aspect."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"We find the malware scanning and intrusion detection most valuable for our server management requirements. We can find out who is on our servers and what they have done."
"The interface and dashboard are okay."
"Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention is a reliable product."
"We use Trend Micro mainly to monitor user activities, such as tracking the websites they visit and purchase items. Additionally, we focus on identifying and addressing antivirus threats. We used to explore a feature related to proxy but decided against it as an enterprise solution wasn't readily available for us. Our primary use of Trend Micro revolves around end-user security. Integration with Active Directory has proven beneficial, allowing us to easily push updates or changes directly from the console."
"We are able to check the log and keep records."
"We find the initial setup to be very easy."
"I'm not an administrator of Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention, but an end-user, and what I like about it is that it can detect events that could cause data loss. It's a good solution."
"I would like to be able to monitor applications outside of the Azure Cloud."
"Given that I am in the small business space, I wish they would make it easier to operate Sentinel without being a Sentinel expert. Examples of things that could be easier are creating alerts and automations from scratch and designing workbooks."
"Sentinel should be improved with more connectors. At the moment, it only covers a few vendors. If I remember correctly, only 100 products are supported natively in Sentinel, although you can connect them with syslog. But Microsoft should increase the number of native connectors to get logs into Sentinel."
"There are certain delays. For example, if an alert has been rated on Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, it might take up to an hour for that alert to reach Sentinel. This should ideally take no more than one or two seconds."
"There is some relatively advanced knowledge that you have to have to properly leverage Sentinel's full capabilities. I'm thinking about things like the creation of workbooks, how you do threat-hunting, and the kinds of notifications you're getting... It takes time for people to ramp up on that and develop a familiarity or expertise with it."
"Sometimes, it is hard for us to estimate the costs of Microsoft Sentinel."
"I believe one of the challenges I encountered was the absence of live training sessions, even with the option to pay for them."
"They only classify alerts into three categories: high, medium, and low. So, from the user's point of view, having another critical category would be awesome."
"Features such as full drive encryption are lacking in the cloud version."
"Sometimes agents hang. We have to reinstall the agents."
"There is a problem when it comes to agent communication and duplicate records, where the rebooting of a machine leads to the installation of a new agent and you get a lot of duplicate records that ultimately affect your compliance monitoring."
"There are some issues we are having with updating our Windows server. So we need to contact support or access our support portal."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade the technology; it's like their area function is not quite as good as compared to other market vendors."
"The way that ePolicy launches the updates is very slow. It would be great if that was faster."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade its technology since the solution's EDR function is not good compared to other vendors in the market."
"We need to consolidate multiple features into one console. It would be beneficial to have all the important features on a single platform."
"Trend Micro could be priced better, currently, it's a bit high. And there needs to be better after the sale, technical support."
"They could improve the product's data loss policies."
"Needs a remote login option."
"I would like to provide improved network direction in order to regulate all of the user agents. We only use Trend Micro Data Loss Prevention to manage various threats and malicious user agents currently."
"Having more features apart from what the product was designed for is what I'd like to see in its next release."
"Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention is buggy, which is one area for improvement. I also found Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention support horrible, so that's another area for improvement."
"Most of the functions don't work in the way that they are supposed to."
"Within the solution, many of the functions do not perform as intended...It is not a stable solution...It is not a scalable solution."
More Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is ranked 9th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 39 reviews while Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention is ranked 13th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 15 reviews. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention is rated 6.2. The top reviewer of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator writes "Useful agent communication, reliable, but lacking support for microservices". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention writes "Good for data blocking and security, content categorization, and generating accessibility reports ". McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is most compared with Splunk SOAR, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Zscaler DLP, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Elastic Security, whereas Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian and Trellix DLP. See our McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention report.
We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) 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.
