We performed a comparison between Symantec Advanced Threat Protection 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."The Application Control code and the easy integration are valuable features."
"All of the solution's features are quite valuable for us. We especially like the threat protection it provides."
"Symantec Endpoint Protection provides end-to-end protection. Along with antivirus protection, it has a lot of key areas, including intrusive prevention, firewall features, and application and device control."
"It has certainly helped out our audit efforts because we each stay compliant in terms of various security standards."
"Endpoint to network protects the line."
"They manage to solve detection quite nicely. There is some rather elaborate detection compared to other providers."
"The most valuable feature is NetFlow threat protection."
"Currently we have 800-plus nodes connected with this solution, without any issues. The solution is scalable."
"It allows us to be more hands off in checking on emails and networking traffic. We can set up a bunch of different alerts and have it alert us."
"The solution can scale."
"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."
"We wanted to cross-reference that activity with the network traffic just to be sure there was no lateral movement. With Trellix, we easily confirmed that there was no lateral network involvement and that nothing else was infected. It helped us correlate the events and feel confident in our containment."
"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."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"Improved our systems and our customers' by providing better malware protection, defense against zero-day threats, and improved network security."
"Scalability could be better."
"It should be able to collect information if the agent is disabled."
"Not ideal for advanced threat protection."
"There are some features that would add value to this product. One of them would be a graphical presentation of threats that the system has encountered."
"There are limits with respect to blocking files by hash value or blocking IP addresses, and these limits should be removed."
"Entire threat protection is not available for the advanced features."
"The administration interface needs a lot of improvement. It should be UI based, and simple. They need to improve it. It's pretty much not that friendly compared to what we were using as Bitdefender before. It's okay but is improving, actually."
"The support has dropped down to a five out of ten."
"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."
"The analytics could be better. It seems heavily influenced by the McAfee and FireEye integration, and that integration still isn't seamless."
"It is not a very secure product."
"It would be a good idea if we could get an option to block based upon the content of an email, or the content of a file attachment."
"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."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
"It is an expensive solution."
More Symantec Advanced Threat Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is ranked 20th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 14 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 37 reviews. Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is rated 7.8, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Symantec Advanced Threat Protection writes "Provides end-to-end antivirus protection and has good stability ". 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". Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Check Point SandBlast Network, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Arbor DDoS, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate and Netgate pfSense. See our Symantec Advanced Threat Protection 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.