Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Reviews

I use Forcepoint SWG to monitor and control my employees' internet usage for both security and productivity reasons. 

What I like about Forcepoint SWG is that I can ensure that employees access only appropriate websites, protecting the organization from malicious threats. Moreover, SWG allows me to track internet usage patterns, helping optimize bandwidth and understand how much time each employee spends online.

In terms of improvement, some of my clients find that certain security details could be enhanced in Forcepoint SWG. Additionally, I would suggest focusing on improving the GUI's stability, especially when implementing new filters or patches. Occasionally, there are issues with crashes during these updates, and smoother transitions would greatly enhance the user experience. 

I have been working with Forcepoint SWG for five years.

I would rate the stability of the solution as a ten out of ten.

Forcepoint SWG is scalable and can handle organizations with over 100,000 users. Additionally, through multiple deployments and clustering, it can scale even further, making it well-suited for medium to enterprise-level companies.

I would rate Forcepoint's technical support as a nine out of ten.

The initial setup for Forcepoint SWG is straightforward and user-friendly. The basic configuration is not very complicated, and you can have the solution deployed in a day. However, when it comes to more advanced configurations or customer-specific enhancements, it can get a bit complex. While the initial steps are smooth, customization might require more effort and expertise.

I would rate the affordability of Forcepoint SWG as a two out of ten. It is relatively expensive. While some other products, such as firewalls and application firewalls, offer similar functionalities, they might be more cost-effective. However, the specific web security features provided by Forcepoint contribute to its high price.

Overall, I would rate Forcepoint SWG as a ten out of ten.

We use the product for DLP and POS protection. 

The tool categorizes the user profiles which is very comfortable. 

The product needs to have more mobility. 

I have been working with the product for four years. 

I would rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution's scalability is good and my company has 1000 users for it. I would rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. 

The product's setup is straightforward. 

The solution's price is good. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

I'm using Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway for web security, particularly DLP. It's mainly to control internet usage for users in terms of what's allowed and what's not. It's also a DLP solution that I use to monitor the data, including information about any data transfers within the organization.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway does most of its job well, but I especially like its data security feature. It also is beneficial that it lets you restrict attachments and allow or disallow users to access templates within the organization.

What's missing in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is a specific level of micro-control on protocols or devices, for example, where you can control a particular user or user device. This is what should be improved in the solution.

I want a micro-level management feature added in the next release of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway.

I've used Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway for more than five years.

My organization had some issues with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway, where sometimes it behaves differently, though it could be version related. The solution has some stability issues, though not very severe so I would rate its stability as seven out of ten. It had minor issues that didn't cause a massive breakdown.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is scalable because it works well even with ten thousand to fifty thousand employees. You can scale it up or down, so the solution is a ten out of ten in terms of scalability.

I'm not fully satisfied with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway support. Though the response time is good, the resolution takes too much time sometimes.

My rating for technical support is six out of ten.

Neutral

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway, setup-wise, is complex unless you get some support. It's challenging to set up using an internal ID.

I'd rate its setup as three out of ten.

We implemented Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway with the help of Forcepoint support and a third party.

The pricing for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is expensive. You pay per user and functionality. I'd rate it a four on a scale of one to ten. Compared to the competition, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is one of the most expensive products.

My company uses firewalls, such as Fortigate, and web security products, such as Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway.

My rating for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is seven out of ten.

My company is a Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway customer.

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.

Our customers' primary use case in the banking sector is for URL history.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway has a lot of issues like troubleshooting and massive troubleshooting which require technical support. A lot of the product is not accessible. You must ask the tech support to communicate to open the root of the product - so that's an issue. But with Cisco you can access the product and troubleshoot.

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. 

The management should be directed to the object itself. They have to make a more flexible management so you can access a device using a normal web browser or you can access a device using a management tool.

Our company has been working with this product for about four years.

Our company prefers Forcepoint, but I prefer Cisco.

There is one issue with Forcepoint that you can't communicate directly with the update. You must have something called the management center to communicate. For Cisco you can communicate directly. With Forcepoint you cannot communicate directly

Scaling is not good with Forcepoint. Even high availability with Forcepoint is not good.

We do have a lot of customers using Forcepoint.

Yes, we have a lot of plans to increase usage because it's the only product we have. There is no other.

The initial setup is not complex, but requires being setup from the beginning. There is no default setting, so you must go to the console and configure the product from the beginning. It takes about 10 days.

This product, especially Web Gateway, has only a small vendor working with it.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway a five.

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.

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.