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 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 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 stability is okay. The performance is also very good. The threat handling is almost near real-time, and even notifications and reporting happen fast so that we can take corrective actions. Overall, the experience was good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I rate Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway a seven out of ten for stability.

It is a stable product.

With stability, the only thing is that that policy synchronization is sometimes delayed, but not much of a delay.

Generally with Forcepoint documentation, whenever we want to change anything on the policy level on the cloud console, it can take 10 to 15 minutes to update the endpoint machine, but generally, it will be updated in one or two minutes. 

That is not a challenge, but sometimes it's taking more than 15 minutes. 

Forcepoint is also performing some back-end activity to update the Cloud Security console, and they are experiencing some downtime. It will be a total of 12-hours to make some changes to the cloud environment that they also pushed the mail to his customer, whoever is using the Cloud Web Security component. So, they're going to upgrade the solution for the specific region. Region-wise, they mentioned for example the India region or any other region. With this specific region, the server going to update, which might be impacted. 

They will have a 12-hour downtime, and after that, the stability will be resolved.

Secure Web Gateway is a stable solution.

I would rate the stability of the solution as a ten out of ten.

The solution is stable.

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

We have experienced several problems with stability, so I would rate the solution at four out of ten for stability.

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It has good architecture. It has an architecture where I have the policy brokers, policy severs, and content creation, as well as an integrated reporting module with a reporting database. I have a team building products with me, including OEM software. When it comes to Forcepoint, it's a very reliable solution.

Not once after the deployment was corrected. Although, we do have an issue with the Real-Time Monitor service stopping on occasion.

My organization had some issues with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway, where sometimes it behaves differently, though it could be version related. The solution has some stability issues, though not very severe so I would rate its stability as seven out of ten. It had minor issues that didn't cause a massive breakdown.

It's reasonably stable but sometimes there are issues in the cloud. 

The stability of the solution is fine. 

There is one issue with Forcepoint that you can't communicate directly with the update. You must have something called the management center to communicate. For Cisco you can communicate directly. With Forcepoint you cannot communicate directly

This service is very stable.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway was pretty stable.

None.

In my opinion, it's a very stable product.

The solution is stable with hybrid as it provides high availability. For example, if your on-premises gateways and your data centers have disconnectivity of power, the cloud gateway still enforces web traffic if you have a hybrid version.

It is stable. That said, at times we do get complaints from customers. Some of the government and banking sites not being accessible via cloud proxy. At times it is required to bypass them or route it through different data centers. Though Forcepoint has no say in some websites restricting the access if they can out with a solution to detect and bypass or redirect the traffic through a working data center it will add further value. 

I am satisfied with its stability. We have got a good network infrastructure.

Not once live in production, it seems to just work.

Forcepoint is more stable than FortiGate and all the others. 

I like the stability of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and feel it to be very useful. 

If you implement it correctly you wont have an issue.

The solution is very stable. I didn't see any issue regarding stability. The hub itself is very powerful. It's very good that I can look at the hardware good or node maintenance and see where there are vulnerabilities. 

The stability of Forcepoint Web Security is very good. I have no issues from the customers. They are very happy with the product.

If you are testing any firewalls, there is no downtime with Forcepoint Web Security. We can directly upgrade our firewalls and we can remove the old plans. We can apply newer plans without any downtime.

Right now, Forcepoint is stable. Before, when it was on-prem, it wasn't stable at all. We needed to restart it and reload it many times.

The hardware is stable. However, recently we experienced some technical issues that took some time to resolves.

We have had issues with downtime, where the service was out one time for 48 hours and nobody knew what was happening.

This solution is very stable because it gives users the ability to have high availability and clustering.

Forcepoint is stable but not 100%. This solution is Websense-based and because of structure, there is some instability. In general, if it is implemented properly then it will be stable.

Stability has been good with this version of code (can say the say with previous versions).

We have not had any problems with the stability of Forcepoint.

Now, the product is quite stable.

Yea, loads of issues.

None.