Skip Links

Network World

  • Social Web 
  • Email 
  • Close

(Comma separation for multiple addresses)
Your Message:

Best data loss prevention tools

Perimeter DLP tools require fine tuning to effectively block 'bad' data from escaping the network
By Nate Evans and Benjamin Blakely, Network World
July 27, 2009 12:10 AM ET
  • Share/Email
  • Tweet This
  • Comment
  • Print

Finding the right perimeter-based data loss prevention tool means striking a balance between speed, accuracy at detecting and blocking sensitive data from exiting the network, and adequate coverage across a broad range of rule-sets and protocols.

Read Network World's DLP Buyers Guide.
Test methodology.

DLP products come in three categories: perimeter-based, client-based and those that take a combined approach. In this test, we evaluated perimeter-based appliances from Fidelis Security Systems, Palisade Systems, Code Green Networks and GTB Technologies.

The DLPs were set up inline (except for Code Green's Content Inspector, which doesn't support in-line mode) between a simulated WAN and LAN and were configured with a set of 10 rules. We then ran about 1,100 files through each device, waiting about a minute between each file, to determine how accurately the device detected and blocked a total of 276 "bad" files and to what degree network performance was affected by the inline DLP.

Here are our key findings:

 All of the products did an effective job detecting harmful files that were sent over the specific protocols that the product supports. But not all products support a wide range of protocols.
 Some of the products that did well at detecting harmful files were less adept at blocking.
 None of the products were able to analyze or block encrypted traffic.
 There's a network performance hit that needs to be taken into account when running these products in-line.

Code Green's Content Inspector scored highest when it came to detection. Code Green also scored high on ease of configuration. But Code Green was limited in the range of protocols it could block.

Our Clear Choice winner is Fidelis' XPS because of its easy-to-use interface, flexible rule-set, amazing reporting, and better-than-average detection and blocking ability.

Palisade's Packetsure and GTB's Inspector were somewhat unrefined by comparison, requiring more work to understand the rule structure and adding unneeded complexity to the overall process. But they were still very competitive when it came to detecting harmful files.

Installation

Generally DLP vendors deploy engineers to the customer site to set up and configure the device, but we decided to do it ourselves to get a hands-on understanding of how the product works from installation through reporting.

For Packetsure and Content Inspector, the basic installation was fairly straightforward and the products were setup with little to no trouble. For the other two products, basic installation was a little more difficult, requiring numerous contacts – via e-mail and phone. But they eventually all were set up without the need for a technician to show up on-site.

After each product was set up and could pass data between the simulated LAN and WAN, we configured the device to our filtering specifications. This included a sample set of 10 rules chosen to test some of the basic features and blocking potential.

The DLPs were set up to look for Social Security and credit card numbers, certain pieces of source code, and five words in a row from a short story, which would be used to prevent any part of a specific report from leaving the network.

  • Share/Email
  • Tweet This
  • Comment
  • Print

Comments (18)
Login
Forgot your account info?

You tested the wrong vendorsBy Anonymous on July 27, 2009, 1:11 pmWhere are Symantec (Vontu), McAfee (Reconnex), RSA (Tablus), and Vericept?

Reply | Read entire comment

you can't protect that which you do not control...By packets on July 27, 2009, 9:18 pmYou must first ask; is this domain and all within yours or already theirs? I agree a Security Gateway device is an obvious needed entry layer, but also a very important...

Reply | Read entire comment

a little secret the DLP vendors don't want you to know ...By Anonymous on July 28, 2009, 6:08 amNone of the products can detect insider use of digital steganography to leak sensitive information or IP. Perhaps you should consider including that in your future...

Reply | Read entire comment

SteganographyBy Anon on July 28, 2009, 10:47 amIf you have someone smart enough to figure out how to use steganography CORRECTLY to leak IP, you have a larger problem at hand.

Reply | Read entire comment

what about DLP through secured file servers for editing and sharBy Anonymous on July 28, 2009, 11:26 amhow about new solutions such as italy's boole server and others special file server technologies that allow users to define rights and access to any and every file...

Reply | Read entire comment

re: you tested the wrong vendorsBy Anonymous on July 28, 2009, 12:08 pmGoldman used either (Vontu, reconnex tablus or vericept) - waste of time

Reply | Read entire comment

View all comments

Add comment
Anonymous comments subject to approval. Register here for member benefits.
Have a NetworkWorld account? Log in here. Register now for a free account.

Videos

rssRss Feed