AuditBoard is a cloud-based audit management software solution from the company of the same name in Cerritos.
N/A
Diligent One Platform
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Diligent One Platform offers a unified solution for Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC) management, providing a comprehensive overview of risks and insights in one place.
N/A
Forcepoint DLP
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention (DLP) protects sensitive data everywhere it resides and moves, across endpoints, cloud apps, web, email, and on-premises environments. It delivers unified policy management and centralized control from a single console.
When evaluating possible audit system vendors, we allowed audit staff to have a say. Most loved the organized, user-friendly, easy to learn AuditBoard system over all others reviewed. Pricing was also fair and the customer service team is very responsive and helpful.
Diligent One Platform has better reviews, dashboards, and tracking management. The interface is clean, easy to read, and nicely organized. The reporting tool and tracker management aspect is nicely done. The learning curve is not high since we have users of all levels, from …
We also explored One Trust, which is also best GRC tool but they do not have up to mark capabilities especially in ERM solution . Diligent One Platform can assess and mitigate risks that could impact organization's objectives.
It has better reviews than any of the competition and provides more features and dashboards for tracking and monitoring. Though the Initial investment was high, the benefits of compliance, BCP, and risk management helped to make the decision.
HighBond by Galvanize was by far the easiest program to set up, implement, and have running in a very short amount of time. It was also very easy for our users to have a moderate understanding of all the features in a short amount of time. The biggest downfall in compared to …
Auditboard is especially useful for SOX control testing. It is very convenient having all our information on a single platform. It is easy to communicate PBC requests to clients, store control testing working papers for review, communicate deficiencies and build dashboards to provide visual statistics. Situations where it might not be useful are for organizations that are smaller in size where the templates don't fit well with their internal audit/controls program. There is a significant amount of testing required before using the platform, and adapting working papers to fit in well with AuditBoard
Diligent Community is well suited for entities in the public sector who need to comply with the Brown Act. Diligent One Platform is not well suitable for those who are not tech savvy. Board members who are older and do not use the Diligent One Platform frequently, are not comfortable using some of the functionality - such as voting - so it still needs to be done on the back-end.
-Where companies need to secure their attachment, which goes outside, means from their company to outside -Where companies need to ensure their client's personal information -Where companies need DLP. They need to look for Forcepoint only, as they have the upper hand over the rest of their competitors.
Enhance business compliance by maintaining records and documents for all our processes and reports, which allows us to not worry about training new people in case resources are transferred.
We integrated risk assessment tools and business continuity plans, which allowed proactive identification and mitigation of potential business risks.
It helped to secure communication channels with confidential discussions and document sharing among team members and leadership.
It has predominantly protected us from unauthorized parties and has provided us with better visibility and control over our data.
This software has also successfully prevented us from both malicious and accidental tasks, which are quite flexible actions when it comes to the violation of data loss prevention policies.
This product has been successful in improving compliance and even mitigating compliance violations, which further facilitated IT security.
I think there is room for improvement, as the user interface is slightly rough and difficult to adopt in the beginning. The software also hangs up at a few instances, which leads to some wasting of time and annoyance, but other than that, this software is good. The technical staff should work on the complexities for a better user experience.
We used to perform our Risk Control Analysis (RCA) for each audit's planning in an Excel spreadsheet. Once we purchased the Risk Oversight module, AuditBoard helped us convert the RCA to a system function rather than a spreadsheet. At first, we lost some of the functionality the spreadsheet provided, but AuditBoard did continue to help us build and work towards a solution more similar to what we previously had. Though happy with it, it's still not perfect. As one example, I'd like to be able to link actual Ops Audit work steps that cover the risk and controls being outlined in the RCA, rather than just adding a comment to state which steps cover them. More of a preference, I suppose.
I also had demoed their beta Resources and Scheduling module, but it didn't have enough functionality at the time to work for how we put the quarterly Internal Audit schedule together (using Excel). One thing I recall was that you couldn't pull in SOX controls or non-chargeable work (such as education or administration) to auditor's schedules; it was meant to schedule the Ops Audits only. It is possible they have already fixed or improved this; I just haven't seen the updated version.
Forcepoint technical support--specially for users who go with essential support--is challenging to get support on time. You need the ticket to be raised long beforehand to get support from TAC. However, in the case of enterprise support, its is not like this technical person will come on a priority basis.
However it comes with higher prices, especially for SMB, it is allowed to pay that amount for support only.
We have been fairly happy with the product and how it has worked. We have looked at other vendors for url filter and such and have not found one that meets our needs or does what we have been doing with Websense. The product has been fairly stable and we have only had a few issues in the past. We have all seen that it was one of the highest leaders from the Gartner Group Magic Quadrant for Web Gateways.
I give it a 7. It has had a significant impact on the GRC department in terms of efficiency and effectiveness. At the start it took some time to tailor it to our unique business needs and to set up all our requirements. I would say the superpower of the tool is really here, in terms of time saving in report prep and manual testing. We have really used the control self assessment ability to have a strong impact on the business which helped to improve the internal control culture across the business. The dashboarding abilities had limitations for us and we created our own internal dashboards more suited to our operational needs. There is a steep learning curve for the admin roles who manage the system but I assume this will be the case for most of these types of systems. On the opposite side the end user usability is very good and easy to grasp.
For us, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention was difficult to administer, did not work well when it did work, was incredibly expensive for the feature set you get, and was difficult to uninstall when we moved on from the software. Once it was fully set up, it worked occasionally for us.
HighBond by Galvanize support has some of the best and fastest support that I have experienced. Though we only contact them through emails, they were quick to provide insightful information about our problems. Whenever we email them about an issue, they would be able to reply in less than an hour, ready and prepared with useful solutions to address the issue.
Support from Forcepoint has been lacking. When calling in with a high priority issue we rarely are able to work with a technician immediately. The queue waits are very long and when you get through there are no support engineers available and we need to wait for a call back for hours it seems.
We’re pretty satisfied with the implementation offering and the reading experiences provided. With our quarterly audits, this tool has made the task much more accessible. The outcome of version control of documents is easy to accomplish, and gathering all the records in one place makes it more accessible.
I remember there were a lot of sync issues when I used the internally developed software, but that's probably because a few people were working on the same project at the same time. I have not come across this issue in AuditBoard
I'm excited about diligent due to the fact that they provide many tools to support compliance through use of analytics and testing processes. We also use FloQast, for which I'm an advocate for, however I'm not sure they have expanded yet to support analytics and testing. I don't have any further experience with other products
User friendly solution that makes it easy to deploy and manage. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention very effective to protecting our valuable data on endpoints and where data lives like in the Cloud, server and on-premises disk drives and its valuable to just set policies once and start utilizing Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention solution.
Hard to quantify. It was cheaper than the tool we had and we were able to get rid of standalone tool for surveys. overall, just better user experience for all.
A lot of time and efficiency has been saved for my team as we continue to find different ways to automate tests, continuous monitoring projects, etc. We have been able to shift our focus on enhancement projects that previously had been on the back burner until we had switched to the Diligent One Platform.
The exchange of financial documents with customers creates extreme risk as data loss could result in financial and reputation damage to the customer. The cost of deploying Forcepoint is fractions of pennies compared to the potential financial impact of data loss.
There is some administrative overhead associated as false positives are inevitable, requiring a manual review and a potential loss of productivity.
