Anyone know know a working configuration to deploy a McAfee 4.8 agent via Software Distribution?

ePO doesn't get the laptops fast enough when they're briefly online. I don't think Kace will completely solve the problem, but it might catch some of the laptops which are the vast majority of unmanaged machines we have in ePO. The agent DL from McAfee has the FrmInst.exe, the MFEagent.msi and 22 other files (no other msi's).

Would it be better to copy the agent from our ePO Repository and deploy that from Kace?

I'm open to any other suggestions as well of course. Just want to tighten up that list of unmanged laptops.


0 Comments   [ - ] Hide Comments


Please log in to comment

Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity



I'm running a distro that deploys the agent 24/7, when the machine checks into kace it gets the mcafee agent. You have to be careful, mcafee agent has two versions managed and unmanaged , the managed epolicy installer contains all the information for your infrastructure (server, certificates,etc) and the other unmanaged does have any of that and needs a ton of extra parameters. 


Here's my distro for epolicy 4.6 "framepkg.exe" /INSTALL=AGENT /SILENT

hope this helps,


Answered 01/16/2014 by: ms01ak
Tenth Degree Black Belt

  • Thank you.
    Managed vs unmanaged? Do you mean that the agent I can download from McAfee.com will cause a machine come up as unmanaged in ePO when I install it? That makes sense I suppose. I'm very familiar with the command line.

    To be clear, the agent (FramePkg.exe) that you're using was copied from your ePO repository (or created by you manually in ePO), correct?

    Sounds like that's the answer I need. I've used that same cmd line to create a Kace script, but pointed it the ePO Repository so it would always use the current Agent and I would not have to worry about loading the new FramePkg.exe into Kace for an actual Software Distribution. However, I'd rather use a Soft Dist in this case as it seems to run sooner when machines check in.

    Thanks again. I'm interested in any feedback.
Please log in to comment