FireMon is a real-time security policy management solution built for today’s complex multi-vendor, enterprise environments. Supporting the latest firewall and policy enforcement technologies spanning on-premises networks to the cloud, FireMon delivers visibility and control across the entire IT landscape to automate policy changes, meet compliance standards, to minimize policy-related risk. Since creating their policy management solution in 2004, FireMon states they've helped…
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.
FireMon is best used in a large environment (for example, I have >100 firewalls in my environment). It's best used when trying to improve security posture and showing changes in firewall security over time. It might not be the best choice for smaller environments or those that aren't concerned about security management.
-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.
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.
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.
The shell is locked out and we can't run any general centos commands. The implementation and maintainence of the arch is very complex. Even with the right identifiers on log messages the log collection keeps failing. The warning messages on the device are ambiguous. The log messages on firemon are a bit confusing and don't show the exact issue.
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.
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.
FireMon has been relatively stable overall. However, there have been a handful of times where we had issues with the console. For example, we couldn't update which devices to include in a security assessment. The initial suggestion from support was to just reboot it. It seems like there weren't many other options available such as to restart services before going to the extreme of a complete reboot.
I'm not sure we have the largest implementation of FireMon out there but we do have a few 1000 devices being probed by FireMon. Overall, the system's performance has been rock solid. The console refreshes quickly and reports are generated within an expected timeframe.
FireMon technical support is awesome! They respond quickly to our requests and they are well trained and very knowledgeable about the tool. Some issues have to be referred to the development team, but technical support largely provides solutions for any issues that we may have.
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.
I has worked with AlgoSec and while they are very similar product, I find the FireMon is easier to understand and get rolling with. While both require some learning, FireMon is by far the easier one. Once you have an understanding of how things are arranged and labeled you can easily import firewalls and begin to work on them to improve them
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.
Firemon Is easily scalable and maintainable with any size team. Although it requires some tech debt, it is well worth the time to invest to ensure compliance is visible and reports are accurate. Although our environment is very large we do not fully utilize the scalability of the Firemon product.
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.
