We performed a comparison between Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense and Symantec Proxy based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Infoblox, Palo Alto Networks and others in Domain Name System (DNS) Security."The most important features for us are preventing DDOS DNS attacks."
"The most valuable feature is blocklisting. It's good at what I like to describe as the "silly side cases." We have this annoying security architecture that says we must do this, that, and the other, so we try to make it easier on ourselves."
"The automatic blocklists are most valuable. A box can maintain several lists from which we can choose if we need to block more or less. We don't have to manually manage the lists ourselves. They're automatically updated."
"BloxOne provides automatic sharing of network context data, which affects our speed of threat response and provide real-time threat intelligence. Our security operations needs this to do their work. It makes us feel safer."
"The dossier feature is perfect for starting an investigation."
"Using the reporting, we can tell that we have gained an extra layer of protection. Just by looking at it, we can see what is being blocked before it even makes it to the firewall. It is definitely working."
"The most valuable feature is policy redirecting and security reports."
"When it comes to helping to detect DNS threats, BloxOne is good on all fronts. The number of false positives is very low, close to none. More than once it has detected new names or lookalike names and protected us and saved us from bad characters."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the URL database, malicious URLs, policies, and policy creation."
"It's a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of Symantec Proxy is the support and autoscaling."
"The tool's most valuable features are content-to-content filtration and SCCM protection."
"Symantec Proxy’s technical support is very good."
"The product is very good, and the URL filtering database is great."
"It is easy to use, and it is stable and scalable. You don't need a large team for deployment and maintenance."
"The most valuable feature is the caching."
"The product could be cheaper."
"A lot of their documentation needs improvement."
"The onboarding is a little rough at times, and you need to have some information at hand. It is pretty good, but it would be useful to have a few good examples to set up things like data exfiltration."
"The setup was horrible. About a year ago, Infoblox made us re-enroll all our on-prem DNS servers by a set date to a specific version, or it would stop working. I told my colleague, "Oh, here, we have to upgrade the servers and reconnect them to the CSP." That did not go well at all."
"We would like to see more reporting capabilities that are now offered only with the on-premises reporting appliance."
"The integration of threat intelligence with other solutions is challenging. If I want to expose threat intelligence, I cannot do it via taxi services. I have to call the API, but the customers are not into creating the APIs. The integration of embedded threat intelligence with other platforms should be better. Infoblox should work on this, and it should be easier for the end user to integrate it. It is very easy to deploy this solution. We should be able to integrate it with other platforms, such as the Next-Generation Firewall, with the same ease."
"The dashboard and reporting features need improvement. The user needs more informative dashboards so they can get to the results directly without getting deep in the report to get to the information."
"Within the past two years, we discovered certain bugs in their products. The resolution of these bugs took a little too much time, especially if our production environment is down for a certain amount of time, then we are losing money. That is hard to convey to Infoblox support, e.g., we actually need the system up and running again within two or three hours. The awareness of these so-called production down incidents is not really easy to convey."
"There are performance issues with all of the proxies."
"The user interface could be improved, and the price could be lower as well."
"Support response time and case resolution could be improved."
"Activating the SSL inspection is one of the challenges. We are currently moving to the O365 cloud, and one of the challenges is the performance when all of our users are connected to O365 by a proxy."
"The traffic filtering could improve. Our firewall traffic is limited. Additionally, it would be helpful if there was a dashboard and reporting feature."
"One area for improvement in Symantec is the lack of a reporting server or dashboard integration with SIM."
"The tool’s reporting features must be improved."
"The platform's pricing needs improvement."
More Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense Pricing and Cost Advice →
Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense is ranked 6th in Domain Name System (DNS) Security with 15 reviews while Symantec Proxy is ranked 14th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 18 reviews. Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense is rated 8.0, while Symantec Proxy is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense writes "Improved the way that we look at data as it comes in and out". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Proxy writes "A scalable enterprise-level tool with advanced features that provide accurate database categorization". Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Palo Alto Networks DNS Security, Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection, Zscaler Internet Access and EfficientIP DNS Guardian, whereas Symantec Proxy is most compared with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway, Skyhigh Security, Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway, McAfee Web Gateway Cloud Service and Zscaler Internet Access.
We monitor all Domain Name System (DNS) Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.