I have previously used Symantec.

Forcepoint offers a more cost-effective solution because everything, including OCR, is included in one package, unlike Symantec, where it is an add-on with an additional cost. We also considered McAfee before choosing Forcepoint.

So, the main reason we chose Forcepoint is the cost because it's a single package.

I've also used Digital Guardian. It is an easier solution to deploy.

I'm also aware of Symantec and McAfee. 

Forcepoint has extensive coverage compared to Symantec or McAfee. The reliability was good. I'm getting better coverage in terms of security, and I get better insights as well.

Symantec also seems to be good. That's my understanding of the market. However, due to their recent acquisition via Broadcom, they have some higher renewal costs. 

Forcepoint, from a coverage perspective, it is giving better insights on the content. We cannot compare the insights with Microsoft, Palo Alto, or even Trend Micro.

Previously, I worked with Symantec DLP and McAfee DLP. Forcepoint is more user-friendly than both of these products.

This is our first solution of this kind.

There has been no other similar solution here, as long as I have been with the company. I started off with a sister company, and they actually used a very early version of Websense, which is what Forcepoint used to be called before it became Forcepoint. That means we have never used a competing vendor.

One of our clients was using the Symantec solution prior to Forcepoint. We convinced them to switch because Symantec does not have a great presence in South Africa and support was an issue.

They had been using it for quite a long time and had not seen the necessary return on investment. With the new legislation, it was time for them to change to something that was more practical, and more user-friendly. The product works great now.

The is the first type of solution in this category that we have used.

I don't believe that we had a DLP in place prior to now.

We had security, but two and a half years ago our agency set out to really step up its information security program.

During that time we have made major investments, in process, like data classification, security concerns, risk assessments, risk management, etc. We do this for a living, so it is important to us.

There were products out there for data loss prevention technology, but we didn't believe that they had yet achieved the maturity that they have today, so it would have been premature to pull something in sooner.

The marketing in and of itself is growing, expanding, and changing. Wait until you get ready to do business intelligence and artificial intelligence and try to secure that when it can bypass you on its own. Give learning machines enough instructions and they will figure a way out.

I have used a similar Microsoft solution to Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, and the Microsoft solution was better. However, we were using Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention because we had a contract.

I have used other solutions. Many of the customers are switching to Forcepoint. They are not getting proper support from one of the vendors. So, they are switching to Forcepoint. They are getting equal or more benefits with Forcepoint, and its cost is also low.

Incident remediation is awesome in Forcepoint. One of the solutions that I used did not have incident remediation. Forcepoint again has the upper hand in terms of policies. It has nearly 1,700 policy templates that we can use. Many compliance-related and PII-related rules are readily available in those templates. Forcepoint also has a time-based policy, wherein they can detect that a policy is active within a certain period of time. This visibility is not there in other solutions. Forcepoint also supports flow data transfer analysis.

Overall, Forcepoint DLP has the upper hand. Stability and scalability are secondary. The primary thing is that an application should be usable. Forcepoint is really user-friendly, and it has multiple options. They say that they can detect the malware if data leakage is happening to malware. They do have some sort of analysis in their detection engine to detect malware.

I have seen Forcepoint replace Symantec or McAfee in some cases. I haven't seen any cases where a client wants to replace Forcepoint.

We have used McAfee DLP also.

I started with Forcepoint only. I have never used any other solution.

We moved from Symantec.

We did not use another solution previously before using Forcepoint DLP.  

Before Forcepoint, we used the McAfee solution for internet security. It had flaws and was lacking in terms of technological advancement.

We still use McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, but most of the time not for DLP. We use it for endpoint solutions such as malware detection.

I used to use Symantec DLP. Licensing-wise, Forcepoint is easier to deploy with less infrastructure. But at the end of the day, if you want the full suite, Forcepoint seems a little bit easier.

We did not have a solution prior to Forcepoint DLP.

We have previously used Endpoint Protector. Both Endpoint and Forcepoint have their own strength and weakness.

From the DLP perspective, I have only used Forcepoint, but from the perspective of general edge firewall URL filtering, I've used Checkpoint. I've also used Sophos in the past.