|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [FW-1] websense versus surfcontrol
Daniel, It's best to do this on the proxy. There are several performance/stability issues when using it with firewall-1 UFP. WebSense is a nice product and can be used along with MS Proxy Server/MS ISA Server. I haven't used SurfControl tho, but I believe their url database is much smaller than websense's. Lars > -----Original Message----- > From: Mailing list for discussion of Firewall-1 > [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Daniel > Morone > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 16:12 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [FW-1] websense versus surfcontrol > > > I can't find an objective comparision between WebSense and > SurfControl. Could you please share your experience good or bad > with either of these products as a UFP server? Also, anybody > done this with HA? > > We currently implement a filter at our proxy server and are > interested in moving to the firewall/UFP. It appears the top > two contenders are WebSense and SurfControl. We may continue > doing reporting off the proxy logs as that's where authentication occurs. > > Looking for comments about: > - list quality > - administration > - performance > - stability > - support > > > ================================================================== > ============== > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at > http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html > ================================================================== > ============== > ================================================================================ To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html ================================================================================
|
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
