Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Reviews

All the proxies have the same features, but the idea here is about URL categorization and the support you have. I found this very interesting in Forcepoint.

In terms of functionality, Forcepoint is the best web proxy available.

I'm an engineer, and as an engineer, I often try to use the best solutions and ones I'm most comfortable with. I like Forcepoint. It's very good for implementation, but it's functionality is great. It has very, very deep technical features, and in-depth introduction features. I really encourage anyone to have it in their environment.

If the solution had a lower cost, it would be easier to implement.

In the 8.5 version of the solution, I took some issue with the interface. 

I'd recommend that the company supports more process to matrix files. We've had issues with that.

The solution should be better able to support itself and operate faster. Sometimes the technical support team takes too long to respond.

I was first introduced to Forcepoint in 2013. At that point, it was Websense and has since been acquired. I've been using the solution in total for about two years. I've spent the same amount of time with the email and web security parts of Forcepoint as well.

The solution is very stable. I didn't see any issue regarding stability. The hub itself is very powerful. It's very good that I can look at the hardware good or node maintenance and see where there are vulnerabilities. 

I implemented it in an environment with multiple users and other environments which included about 20 other items and I've found scalability to be great. You can have a lot of appliances that act as a cluster and you could have high availability on a sort of virtual ID server. You can do additional ID configurations from the other appliances so that typically it extends well. You don't have to have something like download X5. If you have two appliances, you just need to distribute both. For example, you can do it from the configuration. I couldn't find any situation in my work with Forcepoint that was not able to satisfactorily scale. So you can really make it as you wish.

Technical support sometimes takes too long to respond to queries.

In terms of implementation, if you are going to implement Forcepoint, you have to think about how you will deploy it in your proxy environment. You have the ability code, as well as other items. 

If you are implementing Forcepoint in web proxy, it has to be P1 or P2. It has to be on the user onsite as V2 on V5. You could, for some environments, have two interfaces that communicate with each other. You cannot get both to interface, however. If you use the P1 for a user's internet, you then have to make P1 access the internet.

We're a Forcepoint business partner in Egypt.

There are a lot of features already in the application and a lot of features that are added every day, so you have to learn how to implement them. If you decide to use the solution, you have to plan it out and prepare for it. You also have to update your knowledge and make sure your system is updated with regard to the solution. The most difficult part about Forcepoint is that if you take some time away from not working with it you forget features and processes. You need to work on it often and continue learning about it all the time.  

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The primary use that we have for Forcepoint Web Security is for server clusters plus multi-link sites, sites that require not multi-linked ISPs. 

We use Forcepoint Web Security for multi-cluster servers with multi-links so that we can cluster all the multi-links into one link.

For our organization, when we initially deployed Forcepoint Web Security, we were looking to have four different ISP's joined, all the ISP's as one. 

We wanted to utilize all of the network resources in a unified manner. We didn't want to waste other ISP resources. That is the reason why we purchased this firewall.

The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Web Security is creating the easy to install policies that are deployed through the Forcepoint security manual at some stage. Just drag and drop and the policies are there. The cluster is very easy in comparison with other firewalls and the multi-link VPN support is there.

For improvement, we cannot deploy the Forcepoint Web Security firewall directly without ISP. The firewall doesn't have any features because some customers are requesting they will install the firewall without licensing. 

At this time we cannot go further without licensing. Licensing is a must with Forcepoint Web Security firewalls.

I'm not sure that those features are included with Forcepoint Web Security. We checked the other features but we have not checked out their performance.

The stability of Forcepoint Web Security is very good. I have no issues from the customers. They are very happy with the product.

If you are testing any firewalls, there is no downtime with Forcepoint Web Security. We can directly upgrade our firewalls and we can remove the old plans. We can apply newer plans without any downtime.

Scalability with Forcepoint I would rate with an eight out of ten. It is pretty scalable. You can upgrade if you want to expand.

We have a major customer, they are using it with more than 12,000 users. There are currently two security admins and a network admin. They're managing all the firewalls. 

We have a total of 55 firewalls under Forcepoint Web Security. In a year, we are planning to buy new firewalls and expand.

Technical support with Forcepoint Web Security is very good.

The initial setup is straightforward. Deployment, like the initial setup, to configure with the licensing, can be done in two days.

Our use of Forcepoint Web Security is not built on the calculation or the policies, i.e. how the configuration will take place. Based on that, we have two different areas.

The pricing on Forcepoint Web Security is fair. Fair pricing at current market rates, if you are comparing with the competition. 

Forcepoint Web Security is better than Fortinet because Fortinet is free. They still come under the enterprise level of security implementation though.

It is easy to deploy Forcepoint Web Security for whatever type of policies there are out there. We can manage any of our firewalls through one console. Our users prefer Forcepoint Web Security over any other firewall. We look for what the policy of the firewall is and through the console, we can run all the firewall settings.

With Forcepoint Web Security, we can push the policies to all the firewalls. For the upgrade, it can be implemented with no downtime.

I would rate Forcepoint Web Security an eight out of ten. It is easy so we can understand what the policies are and which policy belongs to which firewalls. 

There is no downtime when we are building any firewalls. If any firewall goes down, there will be little to no impact. 

We have found the ease of administration most valuable. The policies are category-based, so knowledge of another content URL is not compulsory. In addition, it is a bit granular. For example, if we accept a policy on a social media platform like Facebook we have the option to limit what can be done on the platform.

The product could be improved by including a consolidated product that can carry on Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway product email, web, and DLP. It's a single licensing suite that carries all the features instead of having a product. Additionally, a consolidated approach to their products would be excellent, and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway should be on the same path to work with peers looking at cloud adoption entirely.

We have been using this solution for approximately six years.

The solution is stable with hybrid as it provides high availability. For example, if your on-premises gateways and your data centers have disconnectivity of power, the cloud gateway still enforces web traffic if you have a hybrid version.

The solution is scalable. For example, if you have between 2,000 to 4,000 users, they advise you to choose a specific size of an appliance, and then you have scalability. Additionally, if you intend to expand, you can add a second device or get a more significant single device.

Hence, you can increase the number of devices to accommodate your scalability or choose a more significant device for scalability. Approximately 4,000 users access this solution in our organization.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. For example, we have support from the EMEA, APAC and the North American region. So, it depends on the time you're logging the call. If you log support calls during the EMEA work time, then you're bound to get engineers from that region.

The initial setup is complex, it requires an expert engineer to complete but managing the solution afterwards is not complex.

I rate licensing costs an eight out of ten.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by including a consolidated product that will carry on Forcepoint product email, web, and DLP.

The Forcepoint client software can be downloaded on a user's machine so that it can filter the sites from home or the office. That's one of the biggest features. We can use it for filtering our laptops for our users at any place.

One of the most important areas of improvement would be the support because we faced a lot of problems when we were on-prem.

I've been using Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway for about four years.

Right now, Forcepoint is stable. Before, when it was on-prem, it wasn't stable at all. We needed to restart it and reload it many times.

Forcepoint is scalable enough to host our infrastructure. We have more than 3,000 users. I don't know if it could be bigger or not, but right now, it's enough for us.

I rate Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway seven out of 10. I would rate it higher, but it has a problem with tablets and the iPhone. It's not filtering on these platforms. It filters on Windows but not iOS or Android.

We are using this solution for web security.

I have found the web content filtering and malware filter the most valuable.

There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve.

I have been using this solution for approximately 10 years.

The hardware is stable. However, recently we experienced some technical issues that took some time to resolves.

Technical support can give a good solution for issues but it can take a lot of time to receive it. They could improve by being faster.

The setup is very easy.

The price of this solution is reasonable.

I rate Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway an eight out of ten.

Our customers are government agencies, and we recommended Forcepoint to add an extra layer of security to their data centers. It's the second layer of protection on top of a layer from another vendor.  And one week ago, we recommended a data leakage prevention solution from Forcepoint for another agency, but this project hasn't started yet.  

I've only recommended Forcepoint to one client so far, and they've been using it for only a few months.

Forcepoint is more stable than FortiGate and all the others. 

In terms of performance, Forcepoint stands out because it is more scalable than any other solution. It can extend to different types of boxes and integrate well with other platforms and vendors. And it doesn't need to have the same kind of box or throughput to have high availability. So Fortinet is the most scalable of all the security systems in the same category. 

With any box security, we need vendor support during the first installation each time. After that, we don't need any support for operations. But the deployment could be easier. It might take from one day to three days. Usually, that involves an engineer from the vendor and a working team at the enterprise.

I think Forcepoint's price is average.

The critical role is web URL filtering.

The functionality of this product in the current version is not up to our expectations.

This product does not have an integrated strategy for securing your web gateway with DLP.

I have been working with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway for approximately 15 years.

We have had issues with downtime, where the service was out one time for 48 hours and nobody knew what was happening.

I don't know of any issues with scalability.

I have been in contact with technical support several times, and I am not happy with them.

We recently stopped using this product and migrated to Zscaler.

Setting up the solution for our clients can be difficult because we are dealing with different timezones and different geography. It also depends on their data center.

The clients sometimes depend heavily on the partners, rather than take time to understand the product themselves.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

My primary use of this solution is to help our customers filter their security and their users' usage. They can optimize internet traffic and block or allow sites.

This solution allows us to control web usage to ensure that our employees use the internet for business research only. It also monitors all employees' traffic, so it gives alerts for searches and can block any websites not allowed by company policies. This means the company can ensure our employees make the best use of their time and get the most value from the internet itself.

The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category.

An area for improvement would be the classification of websites - it can take a long time for new websites to be classified. 

I've been working with this solution for about four years.

This solution is very stable because it gives users the ability to have high availability and clustering.

This solution is scalable but may require a change of hardware in order to handle big changes.

Previously, I used Symantec Blue Coat, which is easier to implement than Forcepoint but has more technical issues.

Implementation can take some time, but there are lots of resources online to help.

I would give this solution a score of nine out of ten.