Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Reviews

We have no big project, but we are trying to sell it in the market here.

We are working with Forcepoint because there is no vendor working with this technology. If we have another vendor working with this technology, we will go with them. All their product is not DLP, only Forcepoint working with DLP. Previously there was Symantec, which was better than Forcepoint.

We have email gateway by Forcepoint also. If we had something similar to Cisco IronPort, it would be better. We are forced because there are limited vendors working with web gateway - only Broadcom and Forcepoint.

We are working with web gateway and full endpoint security.

URL filter is a notable feature. While it is not specifically related to Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway alone, if you have the complete Forcepoint solution, it can integrate with other Forcepoint products, such as DLP solution and email gateway. The URL filter of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is good for web gateway.

Clients and consumers do not prefer it because the interface is not good. When using FSM with DLP, web gateway, and email gateway, upgrades cannot be performed simultaneously since Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway might need an upgrade while email gateway does not, despite having the same manager controlling them.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway works well with banking and small companies. Email gateway is less needed as everything is moving to the cloud.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is not endpoint security. If we have a chance to change, we would change it because it is not user-friendly.

The setup process is complex. You need to install FSM, which is the manager of the web gateway, and the appliance itself. The setup is not straightforward.

We have been using the solution for four to five years.

They have maintained the same interface for about six years without changes.

We previously used Symantec, which was better than Forcepoint.

We recommend it because we have no alternative products working with DLP. Therefore, we have to offer it to both small and enterprise customers.

I have a background in Cisco and can work with their products extensively. Forcepoint firewall is very challenging to work with.

All vendors have been working with AI features for about 10 years in their products.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway an 8.

I use Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway to prevent users from accessing spam websites and allow others. For example, I block sites that are not needed by employees, such as social media platforms like YouTube and Facebook, thus ensuring their productivity while they work.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is mainly used to prevent employees from accessing certain sites and allow others to access specific websites. Based on Forcepoint's insights, we block some sites for classification purposes. 

It efficiently categorizes which sites should not be accessed during work hours. Additionally, Forcepoint does not affect traffic flow, ensuring a smooth browsing experience.

Improvements in the analysis dashboard should allow the retrieval of more detailed information about user utilization. Enhancing the dashboard would provide better insights into users' usage patterns.

I have been working with Forcepoint Web Gateway for one year.

The solution is stable; Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is more stable compared to other products because it doesn't affect traffic flow in any way.

Forcepoint is scalable, allowing it to handle the needs of an organization. It is suitable for expansion.

Technical support from Forcepoint is rated ten out of ten. I have had a good experience with them.

Positive

Previously, I worked with Bluecoat and Symantec Web Gateway. Forcepoint is more stable as it doesn't hang the network or make a bottleneck during high sessions like the other solutions did. The transition provided a better user experience.

The initial setup process is complex and requires a company engineer to perform the setup on-site.

The price for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is normal, rated around five to six out of ten.

I have used Bluecoat, which is now Symantec Web Gateway before switching to Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway.

I rate Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway a nine out of ten. I would recommend it to my colleagues due to its stability and efficiency.

The main use case for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway for our clients is to manage requirements such as blocking sports URLs from 8 to 5. Adding URLs one by one takes significant time because there are millions of website URLs. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway has content filtering, which is a small database categorized on the proxy itself, categorizing all the websites around the world. Most proxies have that feature, and Forcepoint has included it as well.

Content filtering categorizes all websites, so if you want to block sports websites, you can select the sports category to block any sports website, or limit the bandwidth.

The Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway helps our clients safeguard sensitive data significantly, especially when integrated with their DLP solution.

The functions of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway are most valuable due to Forcepoint's long-standing presence in the Web Security business, as it was formerly called Websense, which was in the market for almost 15 years. Therefore, it is sufficiently matured to work as a web security solution. They improved many aspects of the products, and Forcepoint has Threat Seekers or ThreatSeeks, which can download the feed of any latest suspicious URLs to update the proxy. Forcepoint is doing great in this part.

Behavior-based monitoring is a good function, and it is useful. Sometimes we enable this in the proxy if the customer requests it.

Forcepoint can improve the Secure Web Gateway for enterprise-level services. If some internet service providers want to offer Web Proxy as a service, these appliances cannot handle that. They have some high-end models, but they can only handle enterprise networks. They don't have multi-tenancy capability, which is a limitation at only the enterprise level.

Integrating Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway with other Forcepoint products is very easy because it's out of the box. If they have a DLP solution, it can be immediately integrated with it. If they have a sandboxing solution, it is also out of the box. However, integrating with other products requires some custom API and additional steps; it's a challenge for all vendors, not just Forcepoint.

Positive

We are still a golden partner with Bitdefender. We work with Business Enterprise from GravityZone because this is the highest category when it comes to security and EDR. We have one customer who is happy with it.

We are working with Ultra Plus, which is now called Business Enterprise due to updates on Bitdefender products. We are not working with MDR or Managed Detection from Bitdefender because the customer didn't request it.

We have discontinued working with Bitdefender Network Traffic Security Analytics because we stopped supporting the product. We mostly work with Web Gateway and Next-Generation Firewall, and we also handle DLP.

Customizing policy controls through the Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is good, not the worst but not the best. They are doing well, and they might improve it later. We haven't received any bad feedback from customers about the policy. We haven't seen any customers complaining about customization and the flexibility of creating and editing the policies.

Regarding functionality, I am satisfied with the functionality part. I might not be sure exactly what functions they can add to the product.

Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

Anyone working on application development, Ops or DevSecOps, or anyone who wants to redirect traffic from internal to external securely uses the Web Security Gateway. The product also provides a redirection function that is embedded in the Web Security Gateway.

Secure Gateway is similar from one brand to another, however, with Forcepoint, a big advantage is familiarity. Configuration and customized policies are easy to implement.

Currently, they are planning to improve by offering a cloud solution that covers the Web Security Gateway, CASB, as well as email and endpoint DLP. They are gearing towards a cloud-based platform for easier management and implementation.

The technology has been in use for about 15 years.

Stability is rated eight out of ten.

Scalability is close to eight or nine out of ten.

Technical support can be improved. It is currently provided from two locations, India and the US. Depending on the time, the call may be transferred to either country, which can lead to repetition of information as they do not seem to have a unified system.

Positive

Once the use case is identified, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is easy to set up. The initial preparation involves understanding how data traffic will progress from external to internal and then back to external.

Forcepoint is competitively priced compared to McAfee. For a similar setup, Forcepoint might take fewer days to install, which means lower service fees.

The biggest competitor is McAfee. McAfee has a bigger market share in Singapore. However, in terms of functionality, they are the same.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use the solution for malware protection and content filtering. 

The tool's most valuable features are content filtering and URL filtering. 

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway needs to improve its scalability. We have also encountered less frequent performance issues. 

I have been using the product for more than ten years. 

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

I rate Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway's scalability a seven out of ten. 

The solution's deployment is done through the central console, which is easy to do because of the central UI interface. I rate the deployment ease a nine out of ten. 

The solution's pricing is competitive. 

We had evaluated Zscaler and Palo Alto before choosing Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway.  We chose it because we had the skills available. 

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. I recommend using it because it is easy to use and maintain, can be rapidly deployed, and serves as a single point for large enterprises. Additionally, the usability and availability of admin skills make it very accessible.

I use the solution in my company to deal with the area of slowness when we activate a proxy.

If there is a category of generative AI or GenAI, it is not a very detailed category, as there are many AI-based sites where data exfiltration can happen. In the category of generative AI or GenAI, the tool is not updated, and the solution has targeted only four or five sites to be included in the aforementioned category. Categories like generative AI or GenAI are not updated regularly in the solution, making it a problematic area where improvements are required.

The performance issues in the product are an area of concern where improvements are required. The proxy categories in the product have certain shortcomings where improvements are needed. The solution's proxy categories are not updated regularly. The tool's categories, like the one involving generative AI, have certain shortcomings since it does not get updated, and it is not able to target many sites that the developers use for code review, which may lead to some security breaches in the future.

I have been using Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway for two years. I am an end-user of the tool.

The product has been working fine for the previous seven to eight months, but before that, my company suffered a lot because of the downtime and performance issues in the tool.

The solution's technical support did not meet our company's initial expectations. The solution's technical support is not helpful and lacks the required technical skill set to offer professional support. The technical team is unable to resolve many problems attached to the solution, because of which there are many pending issues related to the tool in our company. The product has a support portal on which my company raises all the issues related to the product. I rate the technical support a three out of ten.

Negative

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is an agent-based solution, so my company uses a remote deployment tool to take care of the installation phase.

Compared to the other products in the market, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway can be a cost-effective tool. My company does not want to look at a tool that offers fewer capabilities at a low cost compared to the other products in the market.

I have evaluated products like Netskope and Zscaler against Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway.

The product helps our company improve in the area related to the filtering capabilities.

The effective feature of the solution for threat detection is linked with the malware detection capabilities offered by the product.

The DLP features in the product are not effective. The problem stems from the fact that the product has not been updated for a long time. Most of the policies are based on the fingerprint of data. Sometimes, the tool detects data exfiltration, and at other times, it does not. The efficiency offered by the tool is not very good.

The product's user management is an area where my company does not face any challenges.

The orchestration part is not there in the product. A product like Zscaler can be integrated with multiple tools, including CrowdStrike. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway fails to offer a feature that allows for integration with other products.

I would not recommend the product to others who plan to use it.

I rate the tool a five out of ten.

We used the tool for secure internet access in our legacy environment. We had a firewall. In a corporate environment, when a user goes through the environment, they go through the firewall. However, hardware devices have some limitations. The performance degrades if the number of users increases. Forcepoint is a cloud solution that users can go through. It is scalable.

The solution provided our organization with easy and secure internet access. I did not see any lagging in the solution. It has a good speed. It has good data loss prevention features.

Sometimes, we face reporting issues. The reporting must be improved. We do not have complete visibility. Every organization needs a report on what the users access and how much time they spend on the websites. The reporting features show whether the websites are valid or have malware.

I used the solution for almost one year.

The tool is stable and flexible. The stability depends completely on the administrator who manages and deploys the policy. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The tool is scalable. We had around 800 to 1000 users.

The technical team was good. The support persons had good expertise about the product.

The initial setup is easy. We need to install an agent on the end user’s device. It takes two to three minutes to install. It’s a completely cloud-based solution. We need not alter our environment.

We did the deployment in-house. We need only one person to manage the product if we already have a running environment. If we want to install the solution from scratch, we need three support engineers, one skilled engineer with seven years of experience, and one project manager to coordinate with the customer and the OEM.

The ROI is very good, especially for the higher management. We do not need hardware or a firewall. We need less technical people. Since the product is cloud-based, we only need one engineer to manage 1000 users.

The pricing depends upon the number of users. If an organization has 800 users, they can use 800 licenses. It's user-based licensing. The solution is cheaper than Zscaler.

The product lacks security when compared to Zscaler.

Legacy solutions use traditional ways to secure the infrastructure. Forcepoint has good latency and a handy portal. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Basically, we are the system integrators. We apply it to clients for use cases such as productivity increases. For example, if they want to block Facebook and those kinds of social networking sites, it will help stop users from off-work distractions. They also are now catering to the use case of remote working to control access off-site. That involves cloud solutions.

The reporting part of it is pretty awesome. With the reporting, you can drill down effectively. It gives us a lot of power to really look into what we are looking for. That is one very crucial feature. In the remote filtering part, the agent that they have on Forcepoint is pretty light. That also is a very, very good feature that we look into and sell.

The setup is simple.

It’s pretty stable after you get up and running.

The solution scales well.

Right now, Forcepoint is in very, very good shape. They are developing and evolving very fast. There is not any particular enhancement necessary.

We have had latency issues.

The cloud portal that they have should be more flexible, and we should have a practice portal. For example, if we want to implement something specific, we can’t practice making sure it will be right before going ahead and doing it live.

I’ve been using the solution for eleven years now. It’s been more than a decade. I’ve used it for a while.

Sometimes we do face issues with hiccups in latency. There could be hiccups in, for example, the user setup or the user education part, however, after that, it's okay. It’s not very often we have any issues.

The solution is 100% scalable. It’s not a problem at all. It scales well whether you are on the cloud or on-premises.

We’ve been in touch with technical support. That's nearly our daily task. The tech support is also very good. We are based out of India, so sometimes, being in the India region, we face an issue with timing as we have to deal with time zones. However, they are improving this.

Positive

I am also now starting to work on the McAfee Web Gateway and we are also working with Cisco. I am not particularly dealing with it. Forcepoint has still proven to be the best for me.

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. It’s not overly complex or challenging.

In terms of maintenance, there is none at all, actually. If you implement it correctly in the initial phase, it requires very little interaction throughout.

I don’t deal with any aspects surrounding the costs or licensing. I don’t know what the exact price is.

On the DLP, we are on version 8.9.1, and on the Web Gateway, we are on version 8.5.4. We are using both on-premises and cloud deployments.

We are integrators. I am mainly dealing in Forcepoint, including Forcepoint Web Gateway, Forcepoint DLP, and a little bit of Forcepoint Email as well.

The presales part of the onboarding process has to be very, very proper. Whatever requirements the users are looking for, that should be put on paper, however. Otherwise, if they're expecting something else and the solution is providing something else, this sometimes creates an issue at a later date. Clients need to know what they are getting into.

I’d rate the solution eight out of ten.

It is used for security purposes, CASB, and application controls.

I like the product's scalability and stability.

I want improvements in the application control. Also, the solution should have a secure channel because of malware.

I want technical support to be improved so that they can be faster and more knowledgeable.

I have been using Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway since 2016. Though I want to move to the cloud, I currently use an on-prem version.

It is a stable product.

It is a scalable solution. Around 1,50,000 users are using the solution in my company. We do have plans to increase the number of users in our company.

I have used Forcepoint's technical support, and I feel that it is average.

The initial setup was complex. The time taken for deployment was a year.

The deployment process involved the making of software-based applications. Then, we install it.

For the deployment and maintenance, we need five to seven people, including engineers and managers.

The implementation was done in-house.

I recommend the solution for small-scale businesses using a cloud-based version. For large-scale businesses, it is not fine.

Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.