Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Reviews

The primary use for the product is to protect our intellectual property. Additionally, I use the product for compliance and regulatory purposes, which means ensuring that certain data is protected in accordance with regulations and standard policies. 

I have seen benefits, particularly in terms of increased confidence in compliance with data protection regulations. When it comes to external auditors, I am confident that they won't find any issues related to data protection. Additionally, it has increased my confidence that our organization's intellectual property is not misused or extracted without permission.

I like the product's integration at the network layer, which allows for integration with other vendors' security solutions as long as they are compatible with ICAP integration. For example, integrating DLP with web security or email security solutions. This flexibility is a valuable feature for me as it allows for more efficient use of the product, without necessarily requiring the use of all of Forcepoint's products.

I would like to see the product extended into the cloud as a single solution. It currently requires another product, the Cloud Access Security Brokers, to protect both on-premise and cloud data. I hope it can be consolidated into a single suite, offering protection for both On-Premise and cloud data, users on and off the corporate network, and users using corporate devices and BYOD. It would make the whole DLP process much more linear and efficient. I agree that moving to the cloud is the future and the present, and many people who use DLP have already made a move to the cloud.

I have been using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention for six years, and I am currently using the latest version, which is 10.0. 

I have used over eight versions in the past and kept up with the updates as they were released.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I rate the scalability of Forcepoint DLP as a nine out of ten. It has a supplemental server feature that allows for easy scaling. As the number of users and data traffic increases, all that is needed is to add an additional supplemental server, which is not complex and only requires a Windows machine with minimal specifications.

Let's say you have 10,000 users and one management console or server with two supplemental servers. Your management server stays the same as your user base grows to 20,000. You don't need to increase your management server. All you need to do is add supplemental servers, and you're ready to handle the increased user base and traffic.

Implementing Forcepoint DLP can be a bit complex, as it requires a DLP expert to help with the setup. However, day-to-day administration is quite user-friendly. We are currently using the on-Prem version of Forcepoint DLP as no cloud version is available yet.

We are Forcepoint partners. So as much as we sell the products, we have the technical skill sets to implement the solution.

The term "expensive" is relative. If the ROI is good, no matter the amount of money invested, it is a win-win. If the cost meets the demands or it meets what you set out to do, what you set out to achieve. Holistically, it's not the most expensive compared to its competitors.

Forcepoint is being fully transparent with its costs. There are no hidden costs or extra costs.

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten.

If you are considering using Forcepoint DLP, it is miles ahead of its competitors in the realm of DLP. Forcepoint stands out as the clear leader when we compare pure DLP solutions. The closest competitor would be Symantec, but even they are miles behind in terms of capabilities. So, if you're looking for a top-performing DLP solution, Forcepoint is the way to go.

Some implementations in Forcepoint are easy to do. 

We cannot implement very complex policies or use cases with Forcepoint.

Forcepoint's data visibility is the most valuable feature. 

They need to improve their reporting feature as well as the incident response. They have very limited and basic response rules available for incident management so they need to improve them.

I have been using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention fora year and a half.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The scalability is an eight out of ten. 

The technical support is average.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. It takes about three to four hours to implement this solution.

The solution is expensive. 

Overall, the solution is an eight out of ten. 

We're trying to use the solution for data loss prevention on the endpoints.

Every time I pushed the agent to laptops, I wasn't able to gain visibility.

I do not have any real valuable features at the moment. 

It was mostly stable. 

There is a lot of articles and documentation that technical support direct you to.

Getting tech support to assist us took too long. 

The communication between endpoints and the DLP over the internet was difficult.

The ease of deployment wasn't as flexible as Digital Guardian. We did not have a good deployment experience. 

It needs better pricing.

There is too much going on. We need help understanding all of their tools and offerings. We need to understand their offering, and we don't right now.

An integration deployment feature would be great for APIs. They need to use standard APIs and tools.

They need more resources online to assist users in looking for the most up-to-date documentation. 

I've used the solution for two months. 

I'd rate the stability six out of ten. It was okay. It could have been better. 

I did not look into scalability. 

Customer support simply directs us to links to read up on our own. When we contact support, we need one on one help, not directions to articles. They need to improve the way they deal with customers and be more hands-on. 

Neutral

I've also used Digital Guardian. It is an easier solution to deploy.

The initial setup was not that simple. The solution itself is too big, too vast, to really learn properly. It also wasn't as flexible as we needed it to be 

The cost is too high. They need to work on their pricing model. 

I wasn't a part of the decision-making process. 

I cannot recall the version number we're using. 

I'd advise potential new users to do a proof of concept and check vendor integrations. Increase the POC to two or three months, and don't be rushed into the product until you are ready.

The solution is too fast to learn everything. Digital Guardian was much more manageable. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

Major compliance issues are faced by every manufacturer or by those who use customer data. From a compliance point of view, people want a DLP solution for their organization. Every organization needs a DLP solution to prevent data leakage to external sources outside the company, making it one of the major use cases for every customer as they require a DLP tool that covers multiple channels like email, web, network, printers, USB, and removable devices.

Some of our company's customers who want the tool to deal with some of their use cases are macOS users. When it comes to the area of USB control, macOS takes five to ten seconds, meaning there are some solution-designing problems attached to it. With Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, policies can be applied in Windows within a fraction of a second, but for MacOS users, it takes five to ten seconds, and during these seconds, data leakage from inside to outside an organization can happen. The product is compliant with Windows. My company suggests the product to those who have a Windows operating system in their environment. If you are a macOS user, the problem or concern arises due to the issues attached to the area of USB control. As a whole, macOS is good for users. The aforementioned details regarding macOS need to be considered for improvement.

I have been using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention for 5 years. I am a reseller of the tool.

The product's stability is very good, and it is a major reason why it is considered a market leader.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My company caters to the needs of multiple customers who use the product.

The technical support for the solution is very good.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The time taken to deploy the product is something which depends on the solution or the setup. Mostly, the solution can be deployed within three days, after which some finetuning is required to meet the requirements of our company's customers.

Speaking about how the tool improves data security and compliance posture, I would say that there are multiple products, one of which is a DLP tool, required from a complaint point of view when it comes to data security.

The product's most valuable features for protecting sensitive data revolve around areas like data discovery, data classification, and data leakage. Forcepoint also provides pre-defined templates for data classification covering components like PII, PHI, and PCI.

Forcepoint DLP is a leading tool in the market.

The policy management and the incident reporting system are very easy since, in our company, we just need to integrate it with our user group and users, based on which we configure the policy and apply it within a fraction of a second. The aforementioned details explain why Forcepoint is leading in the market with respect to DLP products.

The data fingerprinting part is a major reason why my company chose Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention. In our company, we need to use areas like PII, PHI, and PCI, so that, though we can share data via emails or any other channels, we get to block specific areas with the fingerprinting feature of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention .

From a DLP perspective, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is the best. There are no other competitors who can compete with Forcepoint in the area of DLP.

In Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, the user risk scoring impacts security operations and incident response since it is very easy to deploy from our company's customers' perspective, and it makes their day-to-day operations very easy with respect to incident response.

The main benefits of the use of the solution stem from the fact that it ensures that there are no chances of data leakage of any confidential data from inside to outside of the organization.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for data theft and for some forensic work.

Forcepoint DLP has very good reporting whether it is at the gateway or it is the LP. The product is user-friendly. 

We faced some issues with the endpoint installation of the agent as it is not from a common ground. Rather than being able to give a command from the central control and install the agents on the laptop, you need to install them one by one.

I have been using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention for 10 and a half years.

This solution is stable. There is no specific maintenance of Forcepoint DLP, it is just a matter of tweaking the product to comply with any new or amended corporate policies.

Forcepoint DLP is scalable, it is just a matter of installing the agents.

Previously, I worked with Symantec DLP and McAfee DLP. Forcepoint is more user-friendly than both of these products.

The initial setup of Forcepoint DLP is neither easy nor complex. The technical setup is easy, however, the user education takes time and can be a bit of a strain. 

If you are considering implementing Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention into your organization, be sure to be clear of your initial requirements. Sometimes users are thinking something totally different and the DLP will not meet those needs. 

Overall, I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

It's for DLP and to monitor and make sure that no key files are being sent out of the organization. It also helps in terms of tracking any abnormal behavior.

We have about 700 users and it's endpoint-based. We add an agent to the endpoints and it coordinates with the server.

With Forcepoint we found that one employee who left had taken some files, and we were able to stop it. And if somebody is under a notice period, we now monitor whether any files are about to go out. When they take something with them, we can see that. We can also identify any abnormal behaviors that are happening. A lot of times it happens that if somebody is about to leave, they try to take some information away with them. We catch that fast.

It also helps in terms of HR stuff because file movement can indicate people who are looking for jobs. We can see CV movements and it helps as an indicator of a dissatisfied employee. We can at least see the behavior and see if we can do something about it.

Before Forcepoint, we had data in terms of how many terabytes go in and out, but now we can specifically see what goes where.

One of the most valuable features is being able to see file movement, where files are going. Every week we review the files. It can identify software codes, so we code files and we know where they're going and who's doing what. It gives us visibility. It shows any key files, any strange behaviors, such as if somebody is taking too many screenshots, and alerts us about that.

I would like to see improvement in the reporting. We can only get one week's worth of data; we can't get more than that. Also, the reporting console is very slow, making it very frustrating to use. There are times when I open it up on a Monday and take a download, but it takes so much time. You can get busy with other things and come back and it's still hanging and you can almost forget about it. 

Also, the server goes down and we have raised tickets to resolve that. In the past two weeks, we've had to deal with that two or three times. It's been a little annoying lately.

I have been using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention for one year.

The system is stable, but as I mentioned, the reporting portion is very unstable. If I want to get reports out, it takes a long time. Sometimes the server is down, and I have to raise tickets. I have had problems there.

The scalability is okay, there are no problems with that. We can add on more agents as we expand with more people. We haven't had any issues there.

I would rate customer service at 8.5 out of 10. When we have problems with the system, they respond and they generally resolve things within half a day.

This is our first solution of this kind.

The initial setup was straightforward but setting up the rules was very complex. It is something where things don't actually work as we think they will work. It generated a lot of false positives in the beginning.

Our deployment took about a month.

Our strategy was to start with auditing first. We haven't actually moved to blocking yet. When we tried to move to blocking critical files, it ended up blocking some other people at work. There are some issues around that and we have had to be careful.

We let it run on its own. I look at the data in Forcepoint on a weekly basis, but we don't have any administration of it, per se. My IT team handles the deployment of new employees coming in, meaning the deployment of the Forcepoint agent on their laptop. That's about it in terms of admin.

An integrator helped us, somebody who deals with Forcepoint products. There were no problems with that, although they were billing by time and the system is a little complex.

We have seen return on our investment because we're able to track our data. It's not so much an active return on investment, but more like an insurance policy. It prevents bad things from happening.

The pricing is reasonable. That's why we went with Forcepoint. They were pretty competitive.

There are no additional costs, other than the cost for additional licenses that we have to pay for ad hoc.

It's not as easy as Zscaler to connect. To be very honest, I think Zscaler has a better product with a better interface, but the cost of Forcepoint is more attractive. That's why we went for it. We looked at McAfee as well. McAfee is a bit resource-heavy. 

Zscaler was very good. The interface was really good and it's easy to set up. Forcepoint is okay. I spoke to some other customers who used Forcepoint and they said, "Look, the interface is a bit complex, but it has everything in place."

You need to put a lot of time and effort into Forcepoint, you need a dedicated team for it. You also need to have a data classification strategy firmly in place. You should classify your data before you get it. You also need to test your rules thoroughly before you implement them.

We use the solution for processing our sensitive data which is strategic data and strategic information exchanged between our top management personnel. 

The purpose was to acquire the solution to protect us from incidents involving the sensitive data from our group getting taken. This happened previously, where data was taken from us and given to another competitor. There was another leak as well and since then we've tried to carefully guard our data and implemented, for example, Apple Mail to protect our mail from third parties.

The product is interesting. It meets our needs very well. It's the best solution when compared to Symantec, for example. We have both ForcePoint and Gartner as well and it's a leader among similar solutions.

The solution offers very good sensitive data protection.

The solution is excellent at protecting strategic information. I deployed it when I was working in the petrol industry for an oil and gas group. It was the biggest one in Morocco. We held important information about critical activities, including providing gas and oxygen for the hospital. We were considered critical IT and we had to comply with the operative elective and the law. DLP helped us to protect our data and we improved our safety in order to comply with the law and existing regulations.

It would be wonderful if the solution could develop more AI and machine learning capabilities. It would also be good if the solution was able to integrate with other ML and AI solutions. Right now, this is lacking.

We started working with Forcepoint DLP three years ago. 

The solution is stable enough.

The solution easily scales. We are able to expand it as needed.

Technical support was good. 

The is the first type of solution in this category that we have used.

In terms of implementing the solution, it's not easy and not complex. It's average. The deployment's level of difficulty is average as well. You just need to have the prerequisites satisfied. 

I appreciate their support because their support was with us to assist us until we deployed the two instances in our infrastructure.

I was the CISO, the Chief Information Security Officer of the company, at the time. My scope was to assist and to manage the project from the start to the close. I worked with the operational security to deploy it.

My scope was to cover governance. For example, elaborating on the policy for classification. It was a prerequisite to define the policy target in the DLP and to organize or to plan for the workshop with the strategic and sensitive entities in our group. I made sure they tried the solution and integrated the entities into the pilot side as well. 

The solution's support assisted us throughout the deployment process.

We were on Office 365 on the cloud. It wasn't enough. Since then, we've described our policy to Apple Mail and have elaborated out information classification. Afterward, we invited the business and the strategic entity to workshops to classify the data effectively and try the solution after implementing the DLP.

We use a hybrid deployment model and acquired the solution with the hybrid functionality to help protect our sensitive data in the inter-managed hybrid space.

The solution has been good, and it has responded to our needs. As a group, we were afraid of the safety around our sensitive data which was exchanged in our mail. We had an obligation to protect the data classified as confidential or restricted. The solution, since implementation, has helped us to protect our data and mitigate risk effectively.

ForcePoint also offers a bundle that includes modules that cover URL filtering and app data for other DLPs. It's very good.

Based on my experience, I advise any other organizations to test, try, and to be convinced by the solution before fully implementing it. Users will need to define exactly what it is they need from it and what their exact needs are to effectively deploy it. I think every user will appreciate that solution. 

We've experienced a lot of cyberattacks, so the DLP is necessary for us and would be beneficial to any company that has critical activities or has staff that exchanges sensitive data.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use Forcepoint primarily for data loss prevention and detection.

The ease of configuration was probably one of its biggest selling points. I know that we took a long time to get it configured properly but it just takes a while. It's a big tool and it does a lot of work.

I don't know where they are going as an organization vendor, because my job ends the moment its implemented, so I would go onto other things.

If I were a betting man, though, I would say that they're going to have to find a way of creating what we call multitenancy, because if for example we have a constituency group set of users who don't work for the department and they contract out, then our work with them is highly sensitive. Being able to separate in segment amounts separately from our core would help. We could use better ways of customer or users segmentation capabilities.

For example, if I wanted to push a report by a certain organizational entity or unit, I wouldn't be able to do that without a lot of work. The reporting could be better.

I think it's going to be hard to beat if they ever decide to replace it. Forcepoint is a pretty good product, we're all pleased with it.

I think it is pretty scalable, at least to the point that we've deployed it to.

We have a workforce of 1,300, of which we have deployed to approximately 800. We also have another set of users who don't work for the department but are contracted out through our agents and sub-agents and they handle the vehicles. We have not deployed to their devices yet, so we have both endpoint and central server data loss prevention technology in place.

We can tell you where anybody went, when they went, how they went, and what they used to get there.

Everybody uses it whether they know it or not, we put out reports monthly on what we call PII information (Personally Identifiable Information). If you know anything about data loss prevention and detection, anytime someone hits a website or even tries to go on, it's logged and captured and we know who went where and what they did, we know what files they looked at and what files they sent, so more power to you. If you want to try something go for it.

We have a CISO, six ISOs (information security officers) or analysts, and over fifteen field service personnel who can work with it. We are pretty broad that way and deep. We have got quite a number of people. Our ISO team itself is comprised of six individuals, a CISO and five analysts.

Security doesn't stop, nor does the pervasiveness of data and its ubiquitous nature. Here at this organization, we don't stop security. We expand it to cover other avenues or channels that come into play. We cover other data structures that are created when another solution takes off. We don't stop simply because it is implemented. It's an ongoing tailored activity we do all the time.

We have six people whose job is just this. Just like technology, we have to stay with it. You can't just throw it up and forget about it. It grows and the rules and policies need to be modified. What people need to remember is that public service is at the whim and fancy of our constituency groups. We report to the legislator, the governor's office, and the citizens of the state. As such, when we put in a system, it has to comply not only with federal regulations but also with state legislators' intent, as well as the governor's office. That is the difference and that is why we take security really personally here.

I have heard good things of the support that Forcepoint gives us, so I would have to say that its good.

I don't work with the product directly but I am very well attuned to what they are doing.

I don't believe that we had a DLP in place prior to now.

We had security, but two and a half years ago our agency set out to really step up its information security program.

During that time we have made major investments, in process, like data classification, security concerns, risk assessments, risk management, etc. We do this for a living, so it is important to us.

There were products out there for data loss prevention technology, but we didn't believe that they had yet achieved the maturity that they have today, so it would have been premature to pull something in sooner.

The marketing in and of itself is growing, expanding, and changing. Wait until you get ready to do business intelligence and artificial intelligence and try to secure that when it can bypass you on its own. Give learning machines enough instructions and they will figure a way out.

To the best of my knowledge, the initial setup was pretty straightforward. We also had quite a bit of coaching that was done for us by the vendor.

We are still working on deployment. It's going to take two to two and a half years. 

It all depends on the political climate that we're in. We are not a normal state agency. We do not have one constituency group, we have multiple constituency groups. We license vehicles, drivers, and professionals, such as lawyers, attorneys, landscapers, architects, etc.

In addition to all of that, we also have a lot of partnerships with law enforcement agencies, courts, lawyers, and insurance companies, so we do a lot of highly technical security programming here. 

We don't just throw it out. We are methodical in how we do this.

We didn't use an integrator reseller or consultant for the deployment. We are doing it our selves.

If I were to give some advice, I would say don't try to do it all at once, it won't work. Know that you're going to go. It's different from building line-of-business solutions. Whereas from a line-of-business solution you work from the outside in, with security programs you work from the inside out. You have to get your data governance in place, as well as information security governance. You need to assign who will be responsible. Decide who to send information to if something does happen. All that has to happen before you begin trying to bring in a system.

You have to know your organization well enough to be able to configure a product to make effective use of it. Don't do it unless you have the guts to do it.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. There are better solutions, but this was better when it came out. When it did come out, this was the best solution we could find. At the same time, I don't know if I would rate anything else higher than that now, either. Every security tool that we have seen has pluses and minuses, advantages and disadvantages.

Another reason we didn't go with the IQ or any management type of component is the deconstruction and the reconstruction of existing security roles. The biggest problem information security has today is the decoupling and deconstruction of active directory designated accounts which for all practical purposes were based on functionality. One role can have multiple pieces of functionality associated with it, so going to a role-based type of solution muddies the waters.

The vernacular needs to change to be more adaptable if they're gonna put out the configuration types of solutions.