No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

D3 Security vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
D3 Security
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (11th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (20th), AI-SOC (28th), AI-Powered Security Automation (5th)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (15th)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
Automation has streamlined multi-tenant SOC workflows and improves alert handling efficiency
Although the reporting within Torq is not that great, we did ask for many features regarding reporting in Torq, but due to some platform constraints, they could not make the whole dataset available for us to be used in reporting. Except for that, we used some basic reporting. When I used Torq, it was indeed in the early stages of AI capabilities. Only a few customers were allowed to use it, and we were among them. It functioned well as long as we summarized the data properly. If you input garbage, you would get garbage out. Thus, we had to do significant fine-tuning regarding what data context we provided to the AI orchestrator to get meaningful results. In terms of Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management compared to managing multiple point solutions across my security stack, I find it case-centric. The unified view in case management is good since it provides clarity, although there are limitations regarding how many items in case management can be modified at once. Bulk operations are very limited, potentially due to their back-end database or data retrieval processes that can be improved. Regarding improvements for Torq, when we were onboarded, there were aspects we were uncertain about, such as the number of cases that could be generated, what data we could bring in, how many clients we could onboard, and similar concerns. Initially, we also lacked clarity about the number of playbooks or workflows we could build. Different triggers like system triggers, case-based triggers, and others can be employed without restrictions, but when it comes to on-demand and scheduled jobs, there is a limitation based on the subscription and pricing tier that notably caps the number of workflows we can create. No bulk editing across cases was one issue, along with limited filtering related to single grouping constraints. Additionally, the out-of-the-box case templates provided require substantial modifications before they become usable. There is also a feature in the cases for notes that cannot be searched. They are only visible through the UI, which is another area for improvement. The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially. I am not sure if new customers are made aware of this. It seems that workflows revolving around cases hinder functionality outside of case management, as we have many use cases needing on-demand triggers and schedules for functions like reporting or polling devices. Creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers. While they facilitate optimization and scaling, the support received tends to be very basic. Improvements can be made in that area as well.
Muhammad Aamir Riaz - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager Security Operation Center at The Bank of Punjab
Offers open API for integrating any available tools without any recurring costs
Before committing, I recommend a Proof of Concept (POC) or demo first. This way, you can see if the product aligns with your specific use cases and security needs. Knowledge transfer is key, and D3 Security's team excels in this area. During the POC, your analysts gain valuable product knowledge, putting them ahead of the curve for deployment. In our case, the learning curve was steep initially, but by the end of the POC, my team was already building playbooks independently. D3 Security also schedules dedicated knowledge transfer sessions during the POC, making it a win-win for both parties. Since technology transfer is crucial for government entities like ours, this approach eliminates the need for additional learning after deployment, unlike with certain competitors like the Fortinet FortiSOAR case. While Fortinet FortiSOAR achieved the desired tasks, its knowledge transfer process was lacking, leaving us with a shaky foundation. D3 Security's approach solidifies the learning and empowers our team. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Binu Haneef - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at Sky News Arabia
Comprehensive security management enabled through efficient integration and automation
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator helps automate routine security tasks. We created customized automation. For example, when we did not have an EDR or XDR solution, we created tasks exclusively for detection and response automation and automatic segregation of infected PCs. The ability to customize the dashboard in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator helps us significantly. The main feature is automation for auto-segmentation and segregation. As we are in an AI era, McAfee can focus on AI tools. Instead of putting manual effort into each security-related task, it can implement more advanced automation using AI. This enhancement could improve cybersecurity significantly. Regarding the reporting area in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, we are satisfied with what we currently have. Our cybersecurity team needs customized reports beyond the default ones. We have more than 20 separate reports for identifying threats, managing, and understanding the security posture of our company and assets.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"If I review about 100 vendors that I might work with, Torq is definitely in the top five that gave me personally investment back, just because every bit of effort I put into Torq eventually became a workflow that gave it back to me."
"Under one SOC tool in Torq, analysts get to know everything within the context of an alert or incident they are working on, and this ability to view the whole picture within Torq is one of the major breakthroughs and best offerings of Torq."
"What I liked the most about Torq is the actual workflow builder, which is really great because they offer a lot of features and convenience features that are useful for any automation engineer."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts, it is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert, I have all the information that I need, I do not need to connect to different vendors to receive this information, and the main thing I got from Torq is time, which now helps me to build another automated system and learn."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"The solution's valuable feature is its GUI. It has more than 450 connectors, which are excellent for connecting devices and automating integration. The solution has all the features we need. We deployed it in our environment, and it's fully integrated. Thanks to their open APIs, the seamless integration makes everything work well together."
"It is an out-of-the-box automated integration with our 20 departments. We perform L1 LiveOps automatically through the portal."
"The general endpoint protection is valuable, and it is easy to manage."
"I made an MSS (Managed Security Service) solution based on the ePO and McAfee Endpoint products."
"It is a highly scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"I like the solution's feasibility. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is also better and easier to use than other ePOs."
"The automation alert for the ticketing tool is one of the vital features"
"McAfee's advantage is that there are fewer false positives compared to some of these other vendors, so I'd say they're doing well."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is its general purpose of protecting our endpoints from infections, malicious files, and all those kinds of things. The fact that there are organized policies and policy inheritance. The general management."
 

Cons

"The case management piece, due to the platform being an automation-first tool, lacks real robust out-of-the-box case templates or good solutions for creating those without spending a lot of time doing development work, which makes the overall experience poor, honestly."
"However, we did encounter some problems with custom steps, which definitely affected our progress, and the speed of bug fixes is also a bit slower than expected."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"There are some issues and bugs that I think need to be fixed, but they are currently not focused on it."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"It was able to capture data but was unable to differentiate between the agent hostname we are using and the hostname that resides on the back end of the Internet."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"The reporting, especially custom reporting, needs to be improved. Additionally, it would be better if it could be hosted on Linux."
"Reporting needs improvement. MTTR and MTTD metrics aren't directly available in playbooks and require manual effort to achieve."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator could improve by supporting container microservices, such as Docker and Kubernetes."
"There are some issues relating to the automation of reports. That's why I wanted the DLP reports. There are some problems in this area. Sometimes it does not work even though all the configuration words are right. There are also some problems with automatic updates."
"However there is no definite SLA when a complicate issue is escalated to McAfee Level 3 or to McAfee software developers."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes."
"The installation process is quite difficult and requires technical support."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator should improve its integration with other tools."
"The solution sometimes has some false positives on IP addresses, from the web control aspect of the product. This needs to be improved."
"I would like to see McAfee reduce the amount of manual work required."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"Compared to other Antivirus products, the cost of this solution is a bit high."
"There is a license required to use this solution. If we use the additional components, such as DLP encryption, there is an additional cost. However, it is similar to a separate product altogether. If you want to use that or not, it is optional, but when you use it, it will cost you additional pricing."
"For large enterprise companies, the price should be alright, but for small businesses, the uptake might be slow because, for these clients, the price doesn't look very attractive."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is not an expensive solution."
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a three out of ten."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is a cheaply priced product, meaning it is not expensive since McAfee provides a free version of ePO, which includes phone support as well."
"It is attractively priced. It is a fraction of what we're going to pay for CrowdStrike or SentinelOne, but it only has a fraction of the capabilities as well."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
26%
Computer Software Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
15%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise13
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which is better - Mcafee's MVision ePO or ePolicy Orchestrator?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Mcafee's MVision ePO or ePolicy Orchestrator network secur...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION ePO?
There is a question regarding suggestions for additional tools or functions for McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, and whet...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION ePO?
The question pertains to describing the use case and process for which people utilize McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator.
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
S&P Global, Scotiabank, Cybereason, Cummins
Brelje & Race, Cognizant, Sutherland Global Services, Eagle Rock Energy, Arab National Bank, Bank Central Asia, Kleberg Bank, Leading Mexican Bank, SF Police Credit Union, Macquarie Telecom, Seagate Technology, Blackburn & Darwen Council, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, IRCEP, Major U.S. State Government, State of Alaska, State of Colorado, Cemex, Deutsche Edelstahlwerke
Find out what your peers are saying about D3 Security vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.