SafeDNS vs. Symantec WebFilter / Intelligence Services

it is well-suited for the following scenarios:Organizations that need to comply with regulatory requirements related to internet usage, such as data privacy and security laws, and that need to monitor and control employee internet activity.Organizations that are concerned about online threats and need to protect their networks and endpoints from malware, phishing, and other types of malicious content.Organizations that need to improve productivity by reducing distractions for employees, and/or need to restrict access to specific websites during work hours.Organizations that need to protect sensitive data such as customer information, financial transactions and other sensitive data, by monitoring and controlling the internet activity on the back-end systems.However, SafeDNS may not be as appropriate for the following scenarios:Organizations that have very limited IT resources and lack the skills and knowledge required to set up and manage SafeDNS Organizations that have specific needs and requirements that are not met by the features and capabilities of SafeDNS, for example organizations that require advanced threat detection and response capabilities.Organizations that may have limited budget, SafeDNS does require a subscription cost, that might not be feasible for smaller businesses with limited resources.Organizations that are using legacy systems that are not compatible with SafeDNS, that may not be able to integrate it to their infrastructure.

In a large environment, this is the perfect system. If you do not have constant changes, it easily becomes a system you drop in place and rarely have to think about. Our units have been rock solid and have never experienced any unexpected downtime, and upgrades are just a couple button clicks to deploy, or roll back. For small offices, with minimal traffic this may be using a sledgehammer to put in a push pin. It will work great, but the devices is likely over engineered for small offices (<50 people). That being said, price-wise it's still a great solution when compared to competing products and being from Symantec, you know it's going to be around and support for the long term.

• block group of website
• report blocked website tentative
• creation of group of profile, like vendor, client, etc.

• Almost real time protection from all ongoing threats with their DLA inspection
• Great visibility into web filtering policies using the dashboards and reports
• No patching or downloads needed, immediate protection is provided as clients are always cloud connected

• Filtering accuracy: While SafeDNS provides filtering of websites, it's possible that it could be improved to more accurately identify and block unwanted content. This could be achieved by implementing more advanced algorithms or incorporating more data sources.
• Reporting and analytics: Some users may find that the reporting and analytics capabilities of SafeDNS are lacking and could be improved, for example by providing more detailed information about internet usage, or more sophisticated filtering and reporting tools.
• Compatibility: Some organizations may have legacy systems that are not fully compatible with SafeDNS. Improving compatibility could make it easier for these organizations to integrate SafeDNS into their existing infrastructure.

• The admin interface would be better off not using Java
• Setting up SSL properly can be a bit challenging
• Could really use a better source for training, like a library of how-to videos

I really like the system, it's easy to use and mostly intuitive. I would have gone 10/10, but the management interface uses Java, and that seems to always make things a bit harder to start. Once everything is loaded and running, it's great - but it does require me to maintain a compatible version of Java on the machine I use to access the system, I'd be much happier with some kind of HTML5 interface. I also deducted 1 point for the functionality of the refer filter - it works as expected, but if the site isn't coded with the correct refer header, like Microsoft's site - then some page elements get stripped and pages only render about 98% correctly. I know that's not in Symantec's list of responsibilities, but having a filter that doesn't fully understand CDNs is worth the 1 point ding.

I've had exactly 1 problem in 8 years, I contacted support via the customer portal, less than an hour later I found myself in a screen share with a support tech who not only fixed my configuration error, but also took the time to ask about my usage and offered some great tips on changes. It was just one support incident, but I was impressed by the speed of response to a non-critical issue as well as the depth of product knowledge the support engineer had.

No comparison. I never could get the Cisco product to function as it should in the trial and their support was poor.

Symantec WebFilter / Intelligence Services solution was a simple 1U appliance that does everything we need, compared to the Forcepoint solution which required a virtual appliance, a database server, a log server, and a management server - the licensing costs alone make the Symantec WebFilter / Intelligence Services solution a clear winner. The Forcepoint solution is really good, it just requires such a big footprint without delivering much beyond what the Symantec WebFilter / Intelligence Services solution does with a single unit.

• prevent offensive content on our materials
• prevent innapropriate use of our materials by the staff

• Boosts business productivity with having secured systems
• Globally available threat protection adhering to our own security policies
• User may sometime find it difficult to deal with - so there can be a feature to make it more user friendly in terms of user experience. That is a bit of negative we have seen.