Blue Coat Advanced Web & Cloud Security [EOL] Reviews

Blue Coat allows access to some sites and blocks other sites, depending on your configuration. I look at high risk configuring. It lets me allow some applications and block others.

We use the on-premises version.

The categorize formula is very helpful. Previously, we used the Cisco solution, where we could not choose how sites are categorized. Blue Coat updated a lot of sites I categorized. There are other valuable features as well, such as block by location, block by IP, allow by IP, and block by user name, domain, or group domain.

Java does not completely work. We are dependent on Java and when the current console does not run with Java, it is a problem for us.

I would also like to seem them change the interface.

For now, it's stable. We have done some troubleshooting and the like.

I hope this solution is scalable because we already implemented this system for more than one client.

We have about 10,000 users. They are in many departments: accounting, business, IT, etc. 

We have three people that maintain the system because the first implementation is already online, so the troubleshooting goes to the administration. The daily work is managed in two versions. The first one has many changes. The other is fine to handle day by day, with actions such as add user, remove user, etc.

Previously, I used Cisco IronPort web filtration.

I switched because this is a newer technology and this product or system comes with a lot of upgrades. I use the most updated technology and solution to cover my system.

The initial setup was straightforward. It has taken a lot of time because we were waiting to have lines come from outside my country since we are working with virtual machines for the first time. Changing from physical to virtual online machines took a while.

We used the central management, which is easy to use and transfer from books to online, or from online to books.

We used a vendor to implement, who supports Blue Coat in my country.

I also weighed Forcepoint and Trend Micro as other possible vendors.

If you need web services, this product covers your needs.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

I am an occasional user. Our IT team primarily uses it. My primary use case of this solution is for web content filtering. 

The content filters and SSL encryption are the most valuable features of this solution. 

The console visibility and the performance impact on the internet need improvement. 

The stability is good. 

The scalability is a bit of a concern based on my discussions with IT. 

We have around 200 users using this solution. We require three staff members for the maintenance of this solution. We do have plans to potentially increase the usage. 

Their technical support is okay. I don't really interact with them.

We previously used Cisco Web Security. We switched because it became end-of-life. 

We also evaluated Cisco Umbrella and Zscaler. The breadth of capabilities was key when making our decision so we chose Blue Coat. 

My advice to someone considering this solution is to look at your longterm needs. 

I would rate this solution a three out of ten. The should include a DNS security layer to improve this solution. They should also make it easier for roaming users. 

Our use cases depend on the customer. The requirement may be for HTTP object caching, URL filtering, or website categorization. It also depends on the user's best practice policies.

As a value-added integrator and distributor, we provide recommendations, installation, and service to all of our customers. We send our customers particular use cases and in return, we are able to set up the policies.

The most valuable feature is the caching technology. It makes the customer's job very simple and reduces bandwidth also.

Other factors that make it the number one choice are web categorization, web filtering, web caching, and bandwidth allocation.

Every customer has to perform a manual backup, and automatic backing up is needed. The customers are eagerly waiting for it.

Blue Coat does not immediately support new operating systems.

It would be amazing if the console did not depend on the Java platform. I would like to see it work independently and not highly dependent on Java.

The solution is very stable. In four years we have not seen any issues with the product.

In terms of scalability, we have not seen any issues. The scalability is very good.

I have done deployments for five hundred users, five thousand users, and even ten thousand users.

We used McAfee before switching to this solution.

The initial setup for this solution is easy. You can configure it within a minute.

Before Blue Coat was obtained by Symantec, they had a deployment portal. It included information on architectures, etc. It's like a playbook. I used all of these documents for the first deployment. After that, for the second deployment, I did it all myself.

Three members of the staff are suitable for maintaining the solution.

The cost is much higher compared to other proxies.

Our licensing costs are yearly, but the customer can choose up to three years.

We evaluated two other products, which were Forcepoint and Websense. We have done a comparison and I have read documents. The price of this solution is a little bit higher than these two products, but we felt that Blue Coat was good.

If you are using schedule-based policies, for example, Monday 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM in the evening, then Blue Coat is the best product to go for.

My advice is that if somebody is using the Blue Coat or Symantec solution, then only use Blue Coat products. They integrate well and you don't need to manage different solutions.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.