Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Reviews

Forcepoint Web Security is a complete web security solution, not just a web filter, like many other solution offerings. The customization and control of URL filtering and the integration with other Forcepoint solutions are great features.

It has definitely added to the security level of the company network and keeps out accidental or purposeful web traffic that can be malicious or inappropriate.

I am looking forward to the full integration of the endpoints that they offer for web security and DLP.

Three years.

It was already done when I came onboard. I have made significant improvements to the deployment.

Not once after the deployment was corrected. Although, we do have an issue with the Real-Time Monitor service stopping on occasion.

No, this solution can be scaled quite high as long as you understand how to expand the architecture.

Customer service is at an extremely high level.

The technical support has improved drastically over the three years that I have been administering it.

I have, but at a different company.

it was a fairly straightforward implementation.

You need to plan it out carefully, so your deployment is good.

This was and continues to be an in-house deployment.

We are getting a high value return from our deployment.

Make sure to understand your environmental needs. Take your time scoping the project, otherwise you will have hardship later on down the road.

Yes, others were evaluated.

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.

Positive

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. 

We are the implementation partner for Forcepoint, and then we configure and integrate Forcepoint into the customer enrollment.

We personally use cloud Websecurity and cloud Email security of Forcepoint.

The initial setup is easy. It's not difficult. 

They have well-integrated web security. They have the enterprise DLP included in the cloud as well.

Technical support has been okay.

The Bitglass part, right now, we are trying to learn it, and then trying to acquire skillsets around it. 

For cloud web security, there are definitely areas where it requires improvement, Policy changes take 20 to 30 minutes for enforcement.

Granular control based on applications can be further enhanced.

I've been dealing with the solution for six or seven years and Websense for the last 15 years.

It is stable. That said, at times we do get complaints from customers. Some of the government and banking sites not being accessible via cloud proxy. At times it is required to bypass them or route it through different data centers. Though Forcepoint has no say in some websites restricting the access if they can out with a solution to detect and bypass or redirect the traffic through a working data center it will add further value. 

We are integrators. We are supporting from 1,000 systems to somewhere around a 10,000 to 20,000 user base.

We have used technical support in the past. There are two aspects. How quickly they respond is one aspect. Then, whatever the answer that they provide, is it of any use. In terms of the response, it varies. Sometimes they will be able to solve it, and then sometimes it may have to be internally taken up to the next level.

Neutral

The initial setup is very simple and not overly difficult. 

I cannot speak to the exact pricing of the solution.

We are integrators. While we typically do cloud deployments off-late, for on-premises, we have deployed Hybrid and on-premises Websecurity deployments.

I'd advise users, if they want to make use of it, to learn the technology and then the approach the product is trying to take. I'd advise users only proceed once they understand it. That way, they'll be in a good position to manage it. As with any technology, learn the basics and building blocks of it.

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten.

For the most part, the solution, when set up correctly, works fine.

Sometimes we find the solution behaves erratically. It may be related to our configuration, which may be incorrect. We are using desktops, laptops, and workstations and the laptops are set to mobile status. We do make connections outside the office premises as well, and desktops or workstations are predominantly located in the same place. 

Overall the software is occupying too much memory space. If they could remedy that, it would be a better experience, because today Windows is occupying too much memory space as well (in terms of the RAM), and this software has also started occupying all the memory. Due to this, I have less space for my other office products and data. I can't, for example, operate a huge Excel sheet or other datasets. 

Product grouping should be made more flexible. We should be in a position to define the product groupings. Also, sometimes the standard product grouping that they are using is not applicable in this part of the world. If they could move it, if they could make it more flexible, it would make our life easier. Otherwise, we are forced to use our own definitions a lot. This sometimes causes problems with performance. The product grouping really should concentrate more on this particular geographic region.

I've been using the solution for about five years.

In my opinion, it's a very stable product.

Companies really have to know how their organization will scale before purchasing the solution. Otherwise, they will be limited. In our case, we've grown far beyond our expectations, and are now facing issues. These products are not that scalable even though the company claims that they are.

The solution is used quite regularly. On average, we use it up to eight hours a day.

We've used technical support in the past. We are one of the major clients for most of these products in India, so we get proper attention from the company. We've been satisfied with the level of support we've received.

We didn't face any major issues at the time of implementation. We were using the facility management of both HP and IBM. They each have their own in-house capability to manage the software. Also, the OEM would have supported them well. As such, we didn't see major issues on any of the software implementation. There were just a few initial hiccups that can happen on any major project.

The version I'm currently using is about four years old.

My recommendation to other companies would be that they should spend more time analyzing their workload including access approvals and whitelisting/blacklisting. They should have a very clear way of defining the blacklist or whitelist.

Companies should also spend more time on sizing the product and considering how they will grow in the future when sizing it. That clarity is a must to decide the proper product size that will last over years as a company potentially grows. 

I'd rate the solution seven 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.

Our primary use case is to control internet access based on security profiles. Users are restricted to legitimate sites and then, based on the business use case, we provide access to streaming sites and the like. We are customers and resellers of Secure Web Gateway and I'm a company director.

All the secure gateways are more or less the same. The value of Secure Web Gateway is the visibility it offers and the ease by which we can put controls in place. We enabled the cloud DLP so we can see what's happening to the data. The solution also provides good filtering features. 

One improvement I'd like to see would be to simplify managing the endpoint for both DLP and web security, so that endpoint management becomes easier. The dashboard is a little old so a new GUI would be helpful as well as updated reporting tools. It currently lacks some features that other solutions have. 

I've been using this solution for over eight years. 

It's reasonably stable but sometimes there are issues in the cloud. 

The scalability is good, our entire organization uses this product including engineers, marketing and administration. 

I'd say that customer service is above average.

The initial setup is straightforward, we deployed in-house and implementation required one person. The initial setup takes two or three days, but rolling it out and making sure that everybody has the required access, and that business applications are accessible, can take a month or so. 

The ROI is like insurance, it's the knowledge that you're protected. The fact that it's taking care of my security needs, is a return.

I'm unaware of licensing costs but there is an extra cost for additional reporting.

It's important to test any solution before making a decision to purchase it. Evaluate your needs and expectations, and carry out a POC. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

The critical role is web URL filtering.

The functionality of this product in the current version is not up to our expectations.

This product does not have an integrated strategy for securing your web gateway with DLP.

I have been working with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway for approximately 15 years.

We have had issues with downtime, where the service was out one time for 48 hours and nobody knew what was happening.

I don't know of any issues with scalability.

I have been in contact with technical support several times, and I am not happy with them.

We recently stopped using this product and migrated to Zscaler.

Setting up the solution for our clients can be difficult because we are dealing with different timezones and different geography. It also depends on their data center.

The clients sometimes depend heavily on the partners, rather than take time to understand the product themselves.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.