Cisco Email Security vs. Forcepoint Web Security

As of June 2019, Cisco Email Security is ranked 1st in Messaging Security with 16 reviews vs Forcepoint Web Security which is ranked 2nd in Web Security Gateways with 11 reviews. The top reviewer of Cisco Email Security writes "Black-listing and white-listing are highly intuitive and easy to do". The top reviewer of Forcepoint Web Security writes "Unifies Network Resources with Multi-Link Support". Cisco Email Security is most compared with Fortinet FortiMail, Proofpoint Email Protection and Symantec Email Security.cloud. Forcepoint Web Security is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Web Security and Cisco Email Security.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
We're consolidating two to three arrays down to one which means that our data center footprint has decreased by like 90%. So we're saving 90% of our space, and it also is much better on power and everything else in our data center. And on top of that, the performance is much, much better than our older arrays.The most valuable feature is the performance and compression. The most useful tool is CloudIQ.Initially, the most valuable feature for us was the SenderBase Reputation, because that reduced the number of emails that were even considered by the system by a huge number...We like the in-built features, like the email filtering based on the IP and domain. Cisco has its own blacklisted domains and IPs, which is very good. This filters around 70 percent of emails from spam, and we are seeing fewer false positives with this.The most valuable feature is the different content filters we are using, such as DKIM.It has the IMS engine, Intelligent Multi-Scan engine, and it does a good job, right out-of-the-box, of blocking the vast majority of things that should be blocked.Anti-Spam and Advanced Malware Protection are the most valuable features... and we also have the option to block Zero-day attacks.There were detailed logs available. That was a seriously good feature... It turns out these were actually spoof emails that came into our environment. I got to know about them from the log system.

Read more »

The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Web Security is creating the easy to install further policies that are deployed through the Forcepoint security manual at some stage. Just drag and drop and the policies are there.It has protected clients against cyberattacks.Giving visibility to people's actions in the network, while keeping attackers out: across data centers, offices, branches, and the cloud.Most valuable features are content filtering and monitoring.Ease of updating the latest hotfixes and patches on the appliance.Transparent Mode: Since we have multiple sites and roaming users, it has helped us in deploying the proxy to users without having to push any configurations to end users.Ability to send decrypted traffic to other security solutions for inspection.Real-time analytics.

Read more »

Cons
We've had a couple of little things come up, but for the most part, they've been pretty stable.We have occasionally had hardware problems because we are using an appliance-based solution, but that might change. We may consider going to virtual systems.The solution needs to improve its advanced phishing filters. It is very good at filtering things which have bad reputations. However, when phishing or malicious emails are new or coming from a legitimate source, we don't feel that the solution is working.We would like to see more options for the customization of content filters.It would be nice to have an easier way to check on the health of the system, how stressed these appliances are. Sure, you can do it, but it would be helpful to have an easier way to do it, maybe even at a glance.The configuration UI should be made more intuitive. Currently, it takes a while to understand how to do the basic configurations.They could improve the filters. In my time at the company, there were several times we had to contact support to update the filters.One of the things that Cisco could improve on with IronPort is the support. Cisco doesn't really have enough engineers who have full, hands-on knowledge of IronPort. Knowledge of it is not something you can find easily compared to other security appliances.

Read more »

The firewall doesn't have any features because some customers are requesting they will install the firewall without licensing. At this time we cannot go further without licensing. Licensing is a must with Forcepoint Web Security firewalls.Ease of use could be improved.There are several issues with the product. Version 8.4 can only be managed with a CLI, they removed the nice GUI interface from version 8.1. The load-balancing needs massive improvements. The incident lists don’t sync between appliances, they need to be manually edited for each one.Improve detailed guidelines to deploy the transparent proxy to Firefox users.Security of browsing.The reporting could be improved.Database synchronization failuresAllow for faster exemption of websites or the ability to reclassify websites.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It is not that costly. We pay for the solution through a contractor and pay an annual fee.We were using Proofpoint and then we switched to Cisco... reportability was one of the main reasons we switched, but the biggest one was cost. If you can get an equivalent functionality for a better price it's wise to do so. That's what our primary decision came down to: We could get equivalent functionality at a lower price point.There were no other costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.The license was not per user, the license model was per feature. You could choose anti-virus, anti-spam, etc. It was feature-based and charged yearly.Licensing costs depend on how many users there are. It could range between $5 and $7 per month, per user.Pricing depends on your environment and which model you want to buy.In addition to the standard licensing, there is a cost for SMARTnet as well.We do annual licensing for ESA and SMA together, and possibly SmartNet support. Packaged together, the cost is just under $38,000.

Read more »

The pricing on Forcepoint Web Security is fair. Fair pricing at current market rates, if you are comparing with the competition.It is quite expensive.It is a well-priced option.Expensive, but with a good reseller you can get a very good price.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Messaging Security solutions are best for your needs.
348,275 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
out of 41 in Messaging Security
Views
16,759
Comparisons
6,311
Reviews
15
Average Words per Review
840
Avg. Rating
8.7
2nd
Views
10,712
Comparisons
4,230
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
264
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
IronPortWebsense Web Security, Forcepoint TRITON
Learn
Cisco
Forcepoint
Overview

Customers of all sizes face the same daunting challenge: email is simultaneously the most important business communication tool and the leading attack vector for security breaches. Cisco Email Security enables users to communicate securely and helps organizations combat Business Email Compromise (BEC), ransomware, advanced malware, phishing, spam, and data loss with a multilayered approach to security.

Websense Web Security blocks web threats to reduce malware infections, decrease help desk incidents and free up valuable IT resources. It has more than 100 security and filtering categories, hundreds of web application and protocol controls, and 60-plus reports with customization and role-based access.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco Email Security
Learn more about Forcepoint Web Security
Sample Customers
SUNY Old Westbury, CoxHealth, City of Fullerton, IndraAdventist Health, Alphawest, Amadori, Anoka County, Compartamos Banco, Davies Turner, EverBank, iGATE, Karlstad Municipality, Lake Michigan Credit Union, Scavolini, Smurfit Kappa, Toyota
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Energy/Utilities Company29%
Healthcare Company14%
Manufacturing Company14%
University7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Energy/Utilities Company75%
Financial Services Firm7%
Comms Service Provider3%
Non Tech Company3%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm25%
Healthcare Company13%
Energy/Utilities Company13%
University13%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business31%
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise50%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business15%
Midsize Enterprise75%
Large Enterprise11%
REVIEWERS
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise60%
We monitor all Messaging 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.

Sign Up with Email