We performed a comparison between Check Point SandBlast Network and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Check Point has enabled us to detect a lot of threats and prevented a lot of threats from entering our environments. It has kept us safe."
"You do not need to risk your network by using the in-line sandbox."
"The zero-day protection is its most valuable feature."
"It has caught some harmful attachments and downloads."
"Check Point SandBlast Network Solution provides signature-based as well as zero-day threat protection. Also sandboxing can be performed on an on-premise device, cloud as well as the combination of both. Threat emulation is done on multiple OS & verdict is provided."
"Preventing zero-day threats and extracting potential threats from incoming files with Threat Extraction is the most valuable feature for us."
"The product gives us advanced protection, including artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies and services."
"The most efficient and protective characteristics of Check Point's SandBlast solution are that we can see a lot of this protection at the network and mail levels."
"Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
"I also like its logging method. Its logging is very powerful and useful for forensic purposes. You can see the traffic or a specific activity or how something entered your network and where it went."
"The product is very easy to configure."
"Support is very helpful and responsive."
"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."
"Improved our systems and our customers' by providing better malware protection, defense against zero-day threats, and improved network security."
"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."
"There should be some customized price reductions in the offered packages."
"I think Check Point provides standard time which ideally most other vendors take to identify behaviors of a file by sending them into a sandbox environment for inspection."
"In Check Point SandBlast, improvement has to be made with respect to the GUI."
"Many Important controls are only available in CLI & very very complicated. All tecli command features should available on GUI so that it will become easy for normal users to monitor & control queue."
"There is a limit on the number of files that can be scanned in real-time, which could lead to us being found with our guard down on a high-traffic day."
"When you have to scan emails that come with attachments, it takes a long time to examine them, which causes other emails not to be scanned, which can cause some danger to our organization."
"We would like to see this solution reach mobile devices more efficiently, through apps or more specific products."
"At the support level, they could improve the attention times and have the resolution of cases happen a little faster."
"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."
"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."
"Based on what we deployed, they should emphasize the application filtering and the web center. We need to look deeper into the SSM inspection. If we get the full solution with that module, we don't need to get the SSM database from another supplier."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
"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."
"I heard that FireEye recently was hacked, and a lot of things were revealed. We would like FireEye to be more secure as an organization. FireEye has to be more protective because it is one of the most critical devices that we are using in our environment. They have a concept called SSL decryption, but that is only the packet address. We would like FireEye to also do a lot of decryption inside the packet. Currently, FireEye only does encryption and decryption of the header, but we would like them to do encryption and decryption of the entire packet."
"It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
More Check Point SandBlast Network Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point SandBlast Network is ranked 8th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 33 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 37 reviews. Check Point SandBlast Network is rated 8.4, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point SandBlast Network writes "High detection with few false positives and able to handle large volumes of data". 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". Check Point SandBlast Network is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Fortinet FortiSandbox, Cisco Secure Network Analytics, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and Symantec Advanced Threat Protection, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Fortinet FortiGate, Zscaler Internet Access and NetWitness Platform. See our Check Point SandBlast Network vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.
