"I like that it integrates with the infrastructure. I also like the kind of data and intelligence that's built-in. It helps create innovative reports for security."
"Some clients only want DNS security, while others want more of the advanced features that it has available."
"Stability-wise, it's good. I have never encountered any bugs."
"The most valuable feature is the website protection capabilities because it prevents end-users from entering bad sites that potentially have malware or could be used for phishing."
"I think recently with many people working from home, Cisco Umbrella has been very useful. For example, we can manage the device and the network when the employee is not working on the local host. Cisco Umbrella is very valuable for this kind of infrastructure."
"What we like most is security and how easy it is to integrate with other appliances."
"The implementation is pretty easy."
"Provides dependable DNS monitoring of external devices."
"The solution’s AJAX-VM provides constant reverse proxy uptime. It has been very positive for our security operations. When people are trying to access the SaaS solution, it protects us from downloading any of that data and experiencing any type of attacks"
"The biggest thing that I like about this product is that it's easy to use and teach. When we have somebody new starting to work with the product, it's easy to teach them. It's also easy to use the product as it does so much."
"The core CASB solution is the most valuable part. It allows us to put policies in place around which devices can log into our cloud applications. We have a policy that states that only company devices can access these cloud applications."
"The solution is very good when it comes to securing us against data leakage, because of the other proxy. It also has API scanning or data at rest. It inspects data in motion, which is the proxy, and then it has the data at rest, which is the API scanning. We can inspect for anything we want: file fingerprinting, PHI-sensitive data, PCI-sensitive data. It does not matter. We can usually find it and block it in transit and do our remediation with it. It could either be block, encrypt, or allow and watermark the file to follow it and see where it goes. It allows for those different scenarios."
"We are able to verify what is getting saved out onto the cloud. It allows us to have some DLP rules, since we have to be HIPAA compliant. If some personal health information has been uploaded to Office 365, then we are able to detect that sort of thing and account for it. We have set up rules to prevent people from doing that."
"The initial setup was straightforward, which was a huge win. That mostly goes to the fact that they are agentless. We didn't have to sit there deploying thousands of agents and all the things that go along with that type of deployment. We were up and running very quickly."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"The critical role is web URL filtering."
"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."
"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."
"The GUI is quite nice."
"It has got a really good URL categorization database. It is simple to set up. It is also easy to use and quite intuitive. It has got a nice utility for troubleshooting."
"The antiviral sandboxing."
"The spam filter is very effective."
"I would like to see more integration between Cisco Umbrella and Cisco DNA Center."
"User interface could be a little smoother and more intuitive."
"It's a very new product, so it's quite immature at the moment. It can be more user friendly."
"I would like them to make some videos, practical videos, the kind with steps that people can use to learn and deploy"
"Missing a real data leakage prevention solution."
"Looking at the full umbrella suite in the light of SASE, Secure Access Service Edge, they are clearly lacking in the inline CASB."
"It could be improved by having a local data center and caching, which can provide protection support. I would like to be able to channel my intel and my network traffic to their clouds, and this feature is not available. Advanced protection or any malware file support, which might be required, is not available."
"The pricing could always be a little bit better."
"I wish they would advance more into the endpoint DLP solution. Currently they do not do anything around endpoint, they're still strictly cloud-based. The forward proxy is really the only thing they do. What I would like to see them do is to scan machines, workstations and servers, for information we might not want on those machines. That would be huge."
"Integration into different multi-factor authentication tools. On their page, they tout Duo, but I don't use Duo. I use another vendor. Not that they don't interact, but it takes a little bit more doing. Any amount of efficiencies here would help."
"In our environment, when an Active Directory password changes, we tend to have some latency issues with access. It takes about 15 minutes before that password is accessible through Bitglass after the change. That would be the major thing I see as a negative."
"Their new SASE (secure access service edge) product would have been the one thing I would have requested. Now that they have that platform, I'd like to see it as integrated and seamless as possible with the core product. That's what they're working towards and that's where we're seeing the advancements."
"Initially, we had some challenges that Bitglass resolved quickly. The challenges were around communication. There didn't seem like there was the right level of communication within the Bitglass organization. Once we brought the issues up at a higher level, then they were resolved."
"There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve."
"The deployment is a bit complex and it requires expertise to deploy, which is something that should be improved and made easier to do."
"We are using a V10000 G3 appliance. It is just a proxy. It is just HTTP, FTP, and HTTPS. Now, as our website has developed and we are using rich time-connectivity protocols, the proxy doesn't have the ability to work with these protocols. It would be nice if the UDP feature was there for it to filter UDP traffic. It needs firewall capabilities for UDP filtering. Its upgrades can be quite complex, and they don't always go as per the plan. Its reporting could be a bit more granular."
"It's the support that's the problem because that's a different question from the product itself — it's the Achilles heel."
"We have a lot of false positives, which is one area that can be improved."
"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."
"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."
"To access the root of the product for troubleshooting you must have a data engineer. This is the big issue with Forcepoint. The support community is not good."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Bitglass is ranked 4th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 6 reviews while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 3rd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 16 reviews. Bitglass is rated 8.6, while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bitglass writes "Enabled us to go to the cloud while accounting for HIPAA and PCI compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway writes "Flexible endpoint security, provides URL filtering, and the reporting is good". Bitglass is most compared with Netskope CASB, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Zscaler Internet Access, McAfee MVISION Cloud and Symantec CloudSOC CASB, whereas Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiProxy, Netskope CASB, Trend Micro Web Security and McAfee Web Protection. See our Bitglass vs. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway report.
See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
