Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Reviews

We are customers of Forcepoint and I'm a senior information security engineer.

I like the encryption feature of this solution as well as the proxy aspect of it. 

The deployment and troubleshooting aspects of Forcepoint are very difficult. Implementation is complex and not user-friendly. In addition, we have a problem because our Mac systems are not able to support Forcepoint which requires us to have two softwares to make it work. 

I've been using this solution for one year. 

The solution could be more stable. 

The solution is somewhat scalable but could be more so. Our whole organization uses the product, we have over 20,000 users. We have at least 10 staff involved in maintenance.

Technical support is good but lacking in troubleshooting skills when it comes to Forcepoint. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

Licensing costs could be cheaper. 

I rate the solution five out of 10.

Forcepoint DLP's most valuable feature is that it provides complete end-to-end security. It gives us an understanding of any violation happening in the network or via endpoint.

The post-optical character recognization feature could be improved because it only really works on documents with some length (at least three paragraphs). If someone has copied half a paragraph or half the content from a webpage, it doesn't work. In the next release, Forcepoint should include DLP, antivirus, and encryption in the same solution, which would resolve many of the IT problems we face.

I've been working with Forcepoint DLP for about five years.

Forcepoint DLP is stable.

This is a scalable solution.

Forcepoint's technical support is very good - they help you the moment you log the ticket. They're much more helpful than Broadcom, Symantec, or McAfee.

The initial setup is very simple and can be completed without an integrator.

Forcepoint has been very cost-effective because they gave us a good deal while procuring the DLP solution, and we just needed to add one license as we already had the appliance-based solution for the web proxy.

We evaluated Symantec, McAfee, and Trend Micro but found that Forcepoint was the best for complete on-premise without comparing the CASB solution, had the best UI, and was the most easily maintained.

I would recommend Forcepoint DLP to other users and would give it a rating of nine out of ten.

We do managed services. We analyze customers' requirements, and then we suggest a proper DLP or endpoint data protection solution. We have implemented Forcepoint DLP and Forcepoint Web Gateway for multiple customers.

Forcepoint DLP helped a lot when an incident was created and we tried to have an auto-remediation of the incident. For DLP, an incident is a key factor. DLP is meant to generate an incident, and that incident should be managed. If no one is managing the incident, DLP is of no use. Forcepoint has an email workflow. It provides email incident remediation wherein an automatic email is generated for the manager. If a person violates a policy, we can configure it in a way that one email is sent to the manager. One email will also go to the end-user. The end-user can again analyze the activity and give us feedback about whether it was a genuine business need and we should release that email, or whether it was a mistake and we should quarantine that email. The decision is made by the manager or by the end-user who sent the email. This helped a lot and reduced the incident count. It was very helpful to have such a report and to be able to say that the end-user was aware of the fact that this email has been quarantined. After providing the legal justification, the email was released by him. It reduced 40% of incidents for emails. This kind of feature is not available in other DLP solutions, and I really appreciate having that feature.

The workflow remediation is quite good. That is a key feature because of which it has the upper hand over other DLP solutions.

Endpoint protection, web protection, network protection, and storage use are valuable features. Among these, endpoint protection is most valuable.

It has good policies and good mechanisms to detect incidents.

They can have less memory consumption for their endpoint channels. They are not that adaptive with other endpoints solutions like EPP and EDR. They can improve in this aspect. 

Their discovery or the way they discover the data at risk can also be improved. There are many database servers that are not supported by Forcepoint.

Their login mechanism to find out the issue is another thing they need to improve. We would like to have the finest login to figure out what exactly is happening and why we are not able to communicate with the detection server. One of the products I have used is better in this aspect. We can have the finest level login, and we can figure it out, but I haven't found such an option in Forcepoint. 

I have been into DLP technology for the last eight years. I have been using Forcepoint for three years.

I have worked with another DLP solution in and out, and I find that solution to be more stable than Forcepoint. Once you implement a policy in that solution, the policy will always function. You can be assured that the policy will be functional. With Forcepoint, I always need to check whether the policy is functional or not and whether my policy is getting synchronized on the detection server or not. There won't be any sort of end trigger if the policy synchronization was stopped. 

It is quite scalable. It is comparable to other DLP solutions in terms of scalability.

I haven't interacted that much with their support, but whenever I created a case, there was proper support. As compared to other solutions, Forcepoint's support is more technical and professional.

I have used other solutions. Many of the customers are switching to Forcepoint. They are not getting proper support from one of the vendors. So, they are switching to Forcepoint. They are getting equal or more benefits with Forcepoint, and its cost is also low.

Incident remediation is awesome in Forcepoint. One of the solutions that I used did not have incident remediation. Forcepoint again has the upper hand in terms of policies. It has nearly 1,700 policy templates that we can use. Many compliance-related and PII-related rules are readily available in those templates. Forcepoint also has a time-based policy, wherein they can detect that a policy is active within a certain period of time. This visibility is not there in other solutions. Forcepoint also supports flow data transfer analysis.

Overall, Forcepoint DLP has the upper hand. Stability and scalability are secondary. The primary thing is that an application should be usable. Forcepoint is really user-friendly, and it has multiple options. They say that they can detect the malware if data leakage is happening to malware. They do have some sort of analysis in their detection engine to detect malware.

As compared to other DLP solutions, it is quite complex because they do have their policy server and analytics server in place, and their Forcepoint manager is also there. With other solutions, we need to have an Oracle Database in place, which is not required with Forcepoint. For Forcepoint, SQL Server can be quickly installed and is ready for use.

The installation duration depends on the organization and the size of the organization. For the same set of organizations, Forcepoint will take 30% less time as compared to others. In many organizations, I have implemented it within a month, and in many organizations, the project took one year.

The implementation strategy depends on the customer, but we do follow the implementation steps, such as gathering information and then deciding which detection server to go for, where to place it, and how many counts are required. If I have more than 30,000 agents, then I definitely need to think about one more endpoint prevent server. So, it depends on the organization size and the response of the organization in terms of how quickly they adapt DLP and how friendly they are with the DLP solution. The biggest implementation that we had done had 30,000 users.

Our customers have seen an ROI. 

Its pricing is quite low considering the features they are offering. As compared to other solutions, it is reasonable. 

They do have professional support. If we need professional support, then there will be additional costs.

You definitely need to do a proper calibration of the organization and data flow analysis. Even though there are 1,700 policy templates, each and every organization will have a different set of rules and data to be analyzed. So, data flow analysis is a must with Forcepoint DLP to create a proper policy.

Cost-wise, it is a very good product. An organization should really consider this product if they are in process of DLP implementation, or if they are thinking of switching from any other DLP solution. If there is a budget constraint or you need a good DLP solution, I would definitely recommend Forcepoint DLP.

I would rate Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention an eight out of 10. There is no DLP that will score a 10.

I am not satisfied with the tool and will replace it since its integration with the Microsoft platform solution, which the company has chosen currently, would be difficult, and we don't want to spend too much time on it. It is easier to have a fully integrated stack. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is not a very well-integrated tool. We also have artificial intelligence, which is easier to directly integrate into the heart of the platform.

The main issue is that you cannot be in security staff and put your data center in Dubai. You need to master your data redundancies. Putting two data centers in Switzerland is fine, and we can use it, but you cannot have DLP rules, and you put your data in Dubai, which can lead to mistakes. Even the rules are really sensitive data. We could think that only the patterns would go in Dubai or whatever, but the rules are the most important part because the rules define what is going to be detected and what won't be detected, and inside the rules, we have everything customized.

No financial institution will be able to keep Forcepoint in Switzerland when they move outside of the data center. The other issue is that when you are doing a setup with the on-premises version of Forcepoint, the big mistake here is the way the software is split. Speaking about the version of Forcepoint you are going to install in your data centers, the issue here is that it is done for a VMware setup inside the data center, so you can have many servers. In the cloud, you are going to pay for what you are using. If you are using eight or ten servers, you are going to pay for ten, making it really expensive. The web version that you can set up of Forcepoint has not been designed for the cloud. The cloud version is located in Dubai.

I have been using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention for ten years.

The solution's technical support was bad as they have no skills at all. We are not able to get replies from the tool's support team. I am not sure if the tool's team could offer advice or consultations because a local company used to do it for the product, as there are just a few skilled people available at Forcepoint, which is also an issue.

Instead of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, I recommend Purview to others, especially if you are located on Microsoft platform, since it helps with compliance and not only as a DLP tool. There is a gap we need to close in Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention as it is useful for security operations. For example, it can be used to ask an end user to unlock your blocked emails.

AI is mostly used when you have to check the DLP inside artificial intelligence, and it is not perfect. We were also looking for SSE solutions, and the point is that Forcepoint could have been a good candidate, but it is located in some bad countries, making it one of the main issues why the tool was no longer a satisfying solution for our company. The tool is also quite heavy. In some cases, it is slow, making it not so comfortable to operate.

The tool is fine for the DLP features, especially when you are on an on-premises model with a data center. If you are on the cloud, I would not recommend it.

Purview and Forcepoint are almost the same, as both can be used to block, upload data, or send emails. Once something is blocked, you ask the security operations, who will start, to provide us with the document we can look at to see if it is legitimate or not.

The incident management process is not based directly on Forcepoint. Forcepoint is used to detect and block, but the response is not done inside of Forcepoint. It is done at the data level.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

The solution helps with data loss prevention. It helps to prevent the loss of customer information in the environment.

The solution’s content classification is the best.

The tool needs to integrate data classification.

I have been using Forcepoint for three years.

I would rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten. The product is stable.

I would rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten. The tool is scalable but it depends on the customer using it. Our company has around 80-90 customers for the solution.

The setup is not complex and it will take around two to three hours for deployment to complete.

I would rate the tool a nine out of ten. I would recommend the solution as a digital guardian.

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.

For our clients, the use of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is to protect their data through web endpoints.

Endpoint security and DLP are the features I have found to be the most valuable ones in the solution.

The solution's interface is still not user-friendly for some customers. So, its interface can be better.

We have a partnership with Forcepoint. Also, we are selling Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention. Basically, we are resellers. I have been working with this solution for the last two to three years. I have been using the latest version of the solution. Currently, my colleagues are using the solution.

Stability-wise, I rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate this solution a nine out of ten. We serve enterprise-level customers.

I rate the technical support of the solution to be an eight out of ten.

Positive

I rate the initial setup of the solution nine out of ten. The solution's deployment time depends on the customers' requirements. It also depends on the environment of the customers. If the customers have a deployment tool, the deployment will be done quickly. Else, it will take some time. To deploy the solution, we provide the customers with a technician to assist them. After that, the customer is responsible for taking care of the people they need for any additional assistance.

We do not handle pricing ourselves. Our pre-sales and sales teams are responsible for pricing. After deployment, the engineer involved in the deployment also assists with pricing.

From one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high, I rate the solution's pricing to be an eight.

Also, there are some costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

Its availability as an on-premises solution is something that I like most about the product. Overall, I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution has a lot of use cases. 

In our case, it was to protect content based on keywords and typical actions like copying to external devices, printing, or taking snapshots, et cetera. 

It has helped us protect our internal data from external threats. It ensures no data reaches the outside via intentional or unintentional sharing of data. 

The email-sharing capabilities are good. We can watch email sharing based on content, keywords, key phrases, et cetera.

The initial setup process went well. 

It is stable.

The solution is scalable. 

I'd like the data classification to be better.

I worked with the solution previously and only just started to use the product again. I've used it for about a year and a half.

It's a stable product. I'd rate it eight out of ten. This is a highly reliable solution. We haven't had performance issues. 

The scalability is pretty good. I'd rate it eight out of ten in terms of growth capabilities. 

We have more than 7,000 people on the solution right now. 

I'm currently not using it, although I have been. I'm not sure if there is a plan to increase usage.

We have used McAfee DLP also.

It is straightforward to set up. It's not difficult at all. I'd rate the ease of setup eight out of ten.

The deployment process took us about two months.

We only needed two people to handle the deployment and maintenance tasks. 

The deployment was on a third-party server. We handled the deployment itself in-house using our own personnel. 

I have not seen an ROI. However, it is worth the money we've invested in it so far.

I'd rate the pricing seven out of ten. It's moderately priced and not too expensive. We pay an annual subscription. There are no hidden costs. You just pay one flat fee.

I did look for various advanced switches and other advanced features and chose this product.

I am a partner. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.