We performed a comparison between Trellix Active Response and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The solution is scalable."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
"It is very valuable in finding out unknown malware."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is stable."
"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"Technical support is excellent."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"Provides good mobile device protection."
"The setup is not that complex. It takes five to ten minutes to set up."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"The reports need more development. They need more details on the reports and more details taking the executive view into consideration."
"The Linux support is very poor. I use base detection. Currently, they are providing malware protection and logon track features in Windows and Mac. These features aren't available in Linux. It will be helpful to extend these capabilities to Linux. We would also like assets grouping and device lock protection features, which are included in their roadmap."
"I hope the solution can be used in cloud systems going forward."
"The product could be flexible and offer better pricing."
"There should be better integration between the ePolicy Orchestrator and FireEye console. The integration of both consoles should be better."
"I would like to see simple processing and reporting online."
"If you have another endpoint product running on the same machine, you have to fine tune functions from FireEye to avoid performance and user experience issues."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Trellix Active Response is ranked 58th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Trellix Active Response is rated 6.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Trellix Active Response writes "Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Trellix Active Response is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR), whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Elastic Security. See our Trellix Active Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.