We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"Cybereason absolutely enables us to mitigate and isolate on the fly. Our managed detection response telemetry has dropped dramatically since we began using it. It's very top-of-mind. We were running some tabletop exercises and none of the detections were getting triggered by the managed security services provider. So we needed to find a solution that would trigger high-fidelity alerts. That was Cybereason and it dramatically changed our landscape from the detection and response perspective."
"The tool has contributed to improving our security posture. While it's just one part of our overall solution, it plays a crucial role. As we continue to evolve, we anticipate it becoming even more important alongside other aspects like network behavior and additional metrics."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"The investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"The extendability is great."
"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others."
"The features we have found most valuable have been containment as well as the ability to triage agent activities."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"Performance is a problematic area in the solution needing improvement."
"You do not have access to all the features when you use the Trellix web interface. For example, you cannot do device or drive encryption from the web interface. Also, when we're working with customers, it's sometimes challenging to get sales support. Delays mean we might lose an opportunity. Lastly, Trellix lacks some documentation about custom features."
"In some cases, the detection part was not accurate enough. We opened a few cases for the vendor to help us with some miscategorized findings on the endpoints. There were some false positive detections, and we had to work with the vendor to get them tested. We even had some incidents that were not detected. It was a black box type of solution for us."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"The product needs to reduce the usage of RAM and CPU."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"The way that signatures work when using this solution could be improved. They could be more user friendly. We would like the ability to select a client's signature from a menu or file share to save time."
"The solution lacks device control."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 42nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 46 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "It integrates well with other solutions, but the vendor needs more of a local presence and faster response". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Darktrace and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, 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 Open EDR. See our Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.
