Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Other Solutions Considered

KC
Manager at KPMG

We evaluated Google DLP and Netskope DLP. We chose Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention because of the ease of policy creation. For any DLP solution to work effectively, we need to create our use cases. On top of use cases, we need to build policies and enforce them. In Forcepoint DLP, it's pretty simple to create any kind of policy and enforce them. It doesn't take a lot of time to get it enforced. It all takes a matter of minutes, and I feel this is the biggest advantage of using this DLP solution.

View full review »
ON
Security Engineer at Protego Trust Bank

I wasn't a part of the decision-making process. 

View full review »
SJ
Deputy Manager of IT at FP LAB

I'm just looking for a SaaS-based model. That's what I am exploring right now.

Fortunately or unfortunately, Forcepoint has not come up with a pure SaaS-based DLP. I'm just looking in the market to see what the best solution I can get is in terms of the same sort of production or to see how I can gradually migrate it or have a one-time migration of my Forcepoint policies directly to the SaaS-based solution. I'm hoping I can reduce my administration efforts in terms of managing the hardware.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention
April 2024
Learn what your peers think about Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
768,740 professionals have used our research since 2012.
AtulVats - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We evaluated Symantec, McAfee, and Trend Micro but found that Forcepoint was the best for complete on-premise without comparing the CASB solution, had the best UI, and was the most easily maintained.

View full review »
AjitMatthew - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal. - Head - IT, Information Security and Admin at a consultancy with 201-500 employees

It's not as easy as Zscaler to connect. To be very honest, I think Zscaler has a better product with a better interface, but the cost of Forcepoint is more attractive. That's why we went for it. We looked at McAfee as well. McAfee is a bit resource-heavy. 

Zscaler was very good. The interface was really good and it's easy to set up. Forcepoint is okay. I spoke to some other customers who used Forcepoint and they said, "Look, the interface is a bit complex, but it has everything in place."

View full review »
AM
Enterprise Information Security Analyst at a retailer with 5,001-10,000 employees

We have never looked at other solutions at a PoC level.

View full review »
PP
Management Executive at a security firm with 11-50 employees

We compared Forcepoint with NetSkope to assess its reporting capabilities and we found that the NetSkope report was very easy to translate, understand, and explain to a business. Forcepoint was instead very cumbersome, unstructured, and illogical. It required an expert to actually interpret the report, which is something that you don't want.

We have also looked at the McAfee product, as well as the one from Microsoft. At that stage, the solution from Microsoft was a little immature and I have not looked at it since. Forcepoint was the leader when we implemented it for our clients.

Comparing Forcepoint to the other products in general, the data discovery capability was great, except for the interpretation of the report. The OCR capabilities were also good for us because it's a telco and they have a lot of paper going through. 

View full review »
SG
student at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees

I did look for various advanced switches and other advanced features and chose this product.

View full review »
MF
System Engineer at ABM Info. tech

The main functionality of both Forcepoint and Symantec is actually the same. But when it comes to deployment, Symantec's solution is difficult to deploy. To deploy Forcepoint I only need three Windows servers, but to deploy Symantec DLP I need eight Windows Servers.

With Forcepoint, we can take backups automatically from the appliance itself, using the Security Manager, in case of disaster. We just schedule a backup job and it takes the backup from there. But with Symantec DLP there is no feature for backing up and we have to do the backup manually.

But for larger enterprises, Symantec provides an Oracle Database where there are no limitations for keeping incident data in the database. Forcepoint uses a SQL database that can't hold as much data. Large enterprises often use the Linux operating system for their core applications. Symantec fully supports a Linux implementation of the core architecture of PLP in a Linux environment, but Forcepoint is only installed on Microsoft. This is one of the biggest factors for larger organizations, given that they often require a PLP solution.

View full review »
DN
General Manager - Presales Cloud & Security at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees

Some of our clients find it to be costly and explore other solutions that are cost, effective.

View full review »
DB
Co-Founder at Avant Consulting

Before choosing Forcepoint DLP we did evaluate other options in the product category like from CA Technologies (Computer Associates, acquired by Broadcom, Inc.). We also considered a DLP product by Symantec.  

View full review »
SA
I-Security Engineer at Nhq Distribution Ltd

Before choosing this solution we evaluated Symantec Data Loss Prevention, but the pricing is too high for most of our customers.

View full review »
YU
Finance and Engineer at a non-tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I prefer Forcepoint for data discovery and data loss prevention. I have evaluated Symantec data loss prevention and ICT (Information Centric Tagging) for classification and discovery.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention
April 2024
Learn what your peers think about Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
768,740 professionals have used our research since 2012.