Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Reviews

Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention works to protect data from attacks, which is a company requirement. It works on networks and has an OCR feature, with OCR being the primary use case for it in my company.

The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is the OCR.

An area for improvement in Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is the complex UI and policy deployment. You have to find the policies, and then designing the policies is also tricky.

As Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention has some complex policy implementations, I want a more straightforward policy deployment from it in the future.

I've been using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention for the last few years.

Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is a stable product.

My company logs tickets in the Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention support portal whenever there's an issue. Support-wise, I'm giving the team eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is easy. My company did a POC and demo session, and the solution is currently in the deployment phase.

The pricing for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is more expensive than Symantec, but it's negotiable. It depends on how well you negotiate. The solution is worth the money, though, based on the services and facilities it provides to my company.

My company uses Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention.

I'm using the latest version of the solution because my company updates Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention every time there's a new version.

My company has more than one thousand Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention licenses.

I would recommend Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, depending on your scenario and the industry you're working in. The primary consideration for using the solution would be your use cases. If it fits your use case, I'd tell you to go for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention.

The solution is quite mature compared to other DLP products, so my rating for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is eight out of ten.

My company is a Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention user.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

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 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.

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.