Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (Full Version)

All Forums >> [ISA Server 2004 Misc.] >> 3rd Party Add-ons



Message

Jimg_Comp -> Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (21.Sep.2005 8:44:00 PM)

Hi everyone,

We have ISA 2004 set up on a 25 user network. Part of this is a computer lab for children. We would like to add a web filter to ISA to protect the kids from adult content. Any recommendations?

Thanks in advance!



Sunny.C -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (22.Sep.2005 2:29:00 AM)

Are you looking for a cheap option or don't mind spending abit, if you don't mind with the spending part i say go for surfcontrol.



andrewmanning84 -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (21.Nov.2005 10:20:37 PM)

I'm looking for the same sort of thing.

I have used Surf Control in the past and its great but a bit pricy [&:]



Sunny.C -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (24.Nov.2005 12:18:07 AM)

Try GFI.



tshinder -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (24.Nov.2005 1:52:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: andrewmanning84

I'm looking for the same sort of thing.

I have used Surf Control in the past and its great but a bit pricy [&:]


Hi Andrew,

Yes, try GFI WebMonitor 3. I have a review that will be up on the Web site soon. Its pretty nice for the price, but doesn't provide the same granular control and comprehesnive database as the pricey offerings, but it may be enough to fit your needs.

HTH,
Tom



andrewmanning84 -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (25.Nov.2005 7:38:54 PM)

I am gonna download GFI now and give it a try.

Will be interested in your article once you have finished it.

Cheers Tom



LLigetfa -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (25.Nov.2005 8:39:37 PM)

Yes, I too am interested in what Tom has to say about WM3.  My OOB (out-of-box) experience with WM3 has been disappointing.

See my Where's the Beef? post http://forums.gfi.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000413



spouseele -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (25.Nov.2005 8:48:09 PM)

Hey guys,

my experience with the current version of Web Monitor 3 is also very disappointing. In my opinion the product is not yet grown-up enough to be really useful. Some posts I made in the GFI forum:
- http://forums.gfi.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000376 
- http://forums.gfi.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000377 
- http://forums.gfi.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000378 

HTH,
Stefaan



Sunny.C -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (27.Nov.2005 9:59:26 AM)

Hmmm that is disapointing  to hear that because i acutally wanted to give GFI ago, i am currently using surfcontrol. The bad side on surfcontrol is
because it runs on sql it chews up alot of the memory and requires a decent P4 server. I have seen at times on my server that it chews upto 1.5GB of the
memory and does not release it. Hopefully with the new sql the problem will be better, for surfcontrols sake.



LLigetfa -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (27.Nov.2005 2:50:41 PM)

Sunny.C,
While this is drifting off topic a bit, you can configure SQL to limit the consumption of memory just as you can for the logging MSDE.  Anyway, memory is cheap and generally, more is better.



spouseele -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (2.Dec.2005 7:38:56 PM)

Hey guys,

check out http://kbase.gfi.com/showarticle.asp?id=KBID002490 . Hopefully some of the big problems have been solved with this new build!

Regards,
Stefaan



LLigetfa -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (2.Dec.2005 8:19:46 PM)

PFFT!
I downloaded and installed it and it now says my eval period is over and none of the functionality that was free before is available.

I guess that is one way to cut down on negative press. :(



Sunny.C -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (5.Dec.2005 8:33:59 AM)

Is it worth the download???? How is the new version guys?



spouseele -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (5.Dec.2005 8:52:11 PM)

Hi Sunny,

I have ran a quick test and this are my first impressions:
  • wpad issue seems to be solved. So the monitoring feature should be usuable now.
  • if an object is blocked by the AV scanning you can get now some indication in the ISA log (URL field). Hmm... why didn't they put that info in the field 'Filter Information' or 'HTTP Status Code'?
  • the site rating is still useless, probably because the YahooSearch service on which this feature is based isn't reliable in the first place.


HTH,
Stefaan



Sunny.C -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (6.Dec.2005 4:44:37 AM)

So i take it that it's still best to stay with surfcontrol. [:(]



LLigetfa -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (6.Dec.2005 5:11:40 PM)

From the negative feedback I read on the GFI forum, I would say it still needs some growing up to do.

Since they removed the freeware version and my trial period has expired, I can not test and report on supposed enhancements.  I did not try cleaning out all traces of it after the uninstall to see if it would reset the trialware counter.



Sunny.C -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (7.Dec.2005 10:08:17 AM)

What spec is your isa server?????
The trouble i have with surfcontrol is that it requires a high spec server.



LLigetfa -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (7.Dec.2005 3:09:58 PM)

Dell PE1750
Xeon 3 GHz
3 GB RAM
16 gig RAID 5
4 NICs, 2 - gig, 2 - 10/100

MSDE constrained to use 1 gig, the rest used for RAM cache.



Sunny.C -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (8.Dec.2005 12:52:58 AM)

Any 3rd party software on isa server???
How many users and networks you have running off it?



LLigetfa -> RE: Recommendations for web filtering add-ons (8.Dec.2005 2:24:26 AM)

I am in DivIT connected by WAN to CorpIT.  CorpIT manages the connection to the ISP through PIX and a Symantec SGS box for content filtering.

I was running just the freeware portion of WM3 until GFI clawed it back so I removed it.  I have no third party app installed.

I manage a 500 node business network.  There is a process network behind mine that is separated by a CheckPoint firewall.  It goes through my network to get out on the WAN/Internet.

The bulk of my users are still on my old MSP2 proxy which has way too wide access.  The web proxy side of MSP2 is broken so users are getting through on winsock with the FWC.  I inherited it as-is from another admin.

I cannot deploy ISA to the masses until management buys into the notion of limited access.  I have only a few nodes going through ISA now based on special needs for extremely limited authenticated users and/or special anonymous access requirements.  Tomorrow, my supervisor takes my proposal for limited access for most users to the managers and if/when they accept it, I will migrate my users to ISA.

The ISA, MSP2, and CheckPoint have rules through the upstream PIX.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>