Microsoft Forefront [EOL] was previously known as MS Forefront [EOL].
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Systems Consultant at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees | 4.0 | I used TMG 2010 for five years; it was a stable, easy-to-manage solution for web proxy and security features. Although its mobile functionality improved, the product is now End-Of-Life and has been replaced. |
| Manager at a consultancy with 501-1,000 employees | 3.0 | Implementing this for clients, I find its solid provisioning engine and customizability are positives. However, the outdated UI, SQL deadlocks, and limited real-time features are major drawbacks, with customer service also being just average. |
| Cisco Network Engineer with 51-200 employees | I appreciate Sourcefire's responsive UI, powerful Snort engine, and robust threat defense, providing great visibility and ROI. Despite minor reporting customization needs and variable Cisco TAC, its stability and low security-incident rate surpass alternatives I've deployed. | |
| Technical Solutions Architect at a university with 501-1,000 employees | 4.5 | We found this solution automated provisioning and made username changes easy. Despite minor deployment issues, it's stable and scales well. Our straightforward setup, costing $100k, achieved quick user provisioning, aided by good consultants. |
| Systems Administrator at a energy/utilities company with 501-1,000 employees | 4.0 | This expensive solution had questionable implementation and a negative ROI for us. A vendor error caused account duplication, and technical support was awful. I believe it's unsuitable for organizations under 2000 users. |
| Senior Consultant at a tech consulting company with 1,001-5,000 employees | 4.0 | I found this review positive, noting the solution's automation reduced user/group management costs. It highlights straightforward setup, good support, and stability, suggesting more connectors and marketing could improve it. |
| Senior Manager of Engineering with 1,001-5,000 employees | 5.0 | We value Forefront Client Security for its central management and effective infection prevention. Although WSUS group policy setup is difficult, we recommend Microsoft protection for Windows, even with MSE's limitations for small networks. |
| Head of Data Center at a tech company with 51-200 employees | 5.0 | I find Microsoft Forefront very cost-effective and effective at cleaning malware without data loss, with great OS integration and central management. However, updating clients is slow without a local Windows Update Server. |
![Microsoft Forefront [EOL] Logo](https://images.peerspot.com/image/upload/c_scale,dpr_3.0,f_auto,q_100,w_100/GqfBeX9zWxZG3rC5hyrUo9Aq.jpeg?_a=BACAGSGT)
