We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Schedule a 30-minute demo or reference call with a real user from the PeerSpot community. Available only to members that are in a buying process for this product and have contributed a review that's then published.

Globalscape Managed File Transfer OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Globalscape Managed File Transfer is #9 ranked solution in top Managed File Transfer (MFT) tools. IT Central Station users give Globalscape Managed File Transfer an average rating of 8 out of 10. Globalscape Managed File Transfer is most commonly compared to IBM Sterling File Gateway:Globalscape Managed File Transfer vs IBM Sterling File Gateway. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 45% of all views.
What is Globalscape Managed File Transfer?

Globalscape is consistently recognized for providing top-notch solutions for securing and automating file transfers for Windows-centric organizations. 

Buyer's Guide

Download the Managed File Transfer (MFT) Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Globalscape Managed File Transfer pricing:
  • "We are paying around 30K per year."
  • "It is much more competitively priced. Axway is probably three or four times more expensive than Globalscape. I like the server-based license. It's easier to manage than a seat license, which our previous product Axway had. Axway's license model is to charge by the account while Globalscape's model is by the server. It is much simpler and much easier when audit time comes."
  • "A large factor in our decision to go with Globalscape was the price."

Globalscape Managed File Transfer Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Venugopal Janga
Solutions & Data Architect at AstraZeneca
Real User
Provides end-to-end information, allows us to create configuration rules without scripting knowledge, and saves a lot of time

Pros and Cons

  • "Its ease of use is most valuable. Especially for the configuration of the rules, we don't need to have any scripting knowledge. Previously, we used to have a lot of custom scripts to transfer these files. Now, it's all managed in one place, and it's like a self-service. It's saving a lot of time for us."
  • "We need some capability for faster transfers and large file transfers. If we want to transfer a terabyte file, it is not capable of doing that right now. They say it is possible, but we are not able to do so with our environment."

What is our primary use case?

We have several use cases. We use it for exchanging files. We use it as a file or SFTP type of storage for B2B type of exchange with customers. 

We also use a lot of rules to transfer files from internal to external systems or from external to internal systems and archive the files. We use a lot of event rules. Our usage is heavy, and we have around 3,000 to 4,000 rules. We sometimes use it for PGP encryption. We also use it when zipping and unzipping files. These are all part of the rules.

In terms of deployment, it is on-prem. We have multi-region on-prem.

How has it helped my organization?

It is our primary managed file transfer capability. On an annual basis, we transfer terabytes of data through this. It has saved a lot of time. It is kind of a self-service, which saves time. Previously, IT involvement was required, which always took more time.

It secures sensitive data inside our internal networks so that only verified users have access. There is a module called the DMZ Gateway module that terminates any external connection so that we don't expose our data to the external network. It doesn't expose any of our data in the backend.

It provides a centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations. The data address is encrypted. So, the storage is only system-accessed. There is no way for people to access that storage. Everything is managed with user-based access and controls. We do have a lot of controls in place, and we have all the details of who is accessing the files.

It enabled us to decommission other solutions. We decommissioned Cyclone for several reasons. The main reasons were that Globalscape was cheaper, and we could cover all the use cases.

It allows us to use automated scripts. This functionality is very important for us because sometimes, we can't do with out-of-the-box functionality, and we need to do some custom scripting. The good thing is that they're allowing VBScript, Powershell, and I think they even allow us to use Amazon CLI.

Our operations have definitely become more efficient because of the automation. We can see a lot of alerting. We can see everything in one place in a dashboard. That has improved operational efficiency a lot. There is still a lot of scope for improvement, but as compared to previously, we have a significant improvement.

It connects to popular ICAP servers to perform antivirus and data loss prevention functions. We have SSL-based, certificate-based management, and we have user-based authentication. We only open the HTTPS port to the outside world. We don't open any other ports. From Globalscape, we connect to the outside or external connection through SFTP or Amazon S3. We have different policies.

It has enabled us to reassign resources who were writing custom file transfer scripts or compiling file transfer audit reports to other tasks. We are definitely able to reuse some bandwidth from this.

What is most valuable?

Its ease of use is most valuable. Especially for the configuration of the rules, we don't need to have any scripting knowledge. Previously, we used to have a lot of custom scripts to transfer these files. Now, it's all managed in one place, and it's like a self-service. It's saving a lot of time for us.

The auditing module is another valuable feature. We have subscribed to the auditing module, and it gives end-to-end information about who downloaded and who uploaded a file. It provides all that information about who is using a file.

Its security features are good enough. In case of any failures, there are a lot of out-of-the-box reports.

It is designed for Windows, which is important for us because we have a lot of use cases around LAN. They will also come with support for Linux.

What needs improvement?

We want to have some capability for cloud-based. They seem to have purchased a different company recently, and they seem to have a cloud-based option. 

We also need some capability for faster transfers and large file transfers. If we want to transfer a terabyte file, it is not capable of doing that right now. They say it is possible, but we are not able to do so with our environment.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for almost 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Because of the on-prem deployment, we saw several hiccups here and there in terms of stability, but overall, it is okay. It also depends on the capacity and the bandwidth. There are also several other factors. From the cloud perspective, I think it is okay.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We can add more nodes. So, based on the type of load, we upgraded and added a couple of nodes in the EMEA region. Overall, it is scalable.

We have three regions. We manage 24/7 with five to six resources across the regions. From the solution perspective, we don't need to increase the size of the platforms, but we need to optimize overall operations. We are spending a lot of time on patching and upgrading. So, if we go for one instance of cloud, the effort will reduce.

How are customer service and support?

Their technical support is good. There are two or three levels of support. Recently, they have assigned a Technical Account Manager (TAM). From the response perspective, overall, I'd rate them an eight out of 10.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Cyclone. We switched because of two factors. One was the size. There were too many servers, and it was very less from the cost perspective. It also covered a lot of use cases, such as event rules.

How was the initial setup?

It was straightforward. It was a simple installation. We had some internal validation processes for deployment. Otherwise, Its implementation takes a couple of days. If you have all the servers ready, it is quick to install.

What about the implementation team?

We worked with Globalscape. Globalscape helped us, and their architect confirmed our deployment options. It was a simple process.

What was our ROI?

I don't have an exact number. We definitely pay one-tenth of the cost as compared to our previous solution. That's a significant difference, and it is covering all the bases.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We are paying around 30K per year.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We tried IBM Aspera. It is for big data use cases. We evaluated it for terabyte type of data, but we didn't move forward with that. I think we've got it for one year but in some other group.

Aspera's price was high. Globalscape was one solution covering all the use cases, and that was a key factor for us. From a support perspective, we didn't want multiple vendors for each use case. Globalscape already had a module for our use case. That was the reason for going with Globalscape.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend this solution. Being in the middleware space, I work on several other technologies within our group. Oracle has an MFT, and Amazon is also planning to have the managed file transfer, but I recommend Globalscape. It is in the top quadrant from Gartner's Quadrant perspective, and they have recently acquired a lot of small companies in different areas. They are okay in terms of the product roadmap.

We don't use Globalscape to automate the submission of regulatory documentation, but there are connections to FDA and CFDA. We use this as a transport tool but not as a submission tool. We do have the FDA and email connections.

The automation of file transfers has reduced the workload but it depends on multiple factors. It also depends on the bandwidth part. There are a lot of features, but when we are transferring across our client base, it can be a little bit slow. It is based on the type of protocol. They have some modules, but we haven't yet used those UDP-based transfers.

Its connection to popular ICAP servers helps inspect content for sensitive information, such as credit cards, and it has some advanced security modules, but we never used them. It automatically does advanced checksum and several other redundancy checks.

As a solution, I would rate it a nine out of 10. There are a few areas they need to improve on. They recently came up with the cloud option and different deployment options, but we haven't used those yet. We need to use those options.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate
JamesStarkweather
Senior Cloud Engineer at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Rock solid, secure, and excellent price and quality of service

Pros and Cons

  • "The High Security Module is valuable. It allows for increased security. It allows me to integrate Globalscape with our Active Directory. So, we manage all our customer accounts outside of Globalscape, and it allows us to import them with LDAP queries. It's very convenient. It also gives our customers the confidence that it's a very secure product."
  • "Instead of using a fat client to access the administrator panel, where you have to install client software on any server that you need to use to access, I would like them to switch to a web-based model where you could connect from anywhere without having to maintain and install the software."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for file transfers. 100% of our customers connect through Globalscape to bring their files to our data center. So, it is a hosted service, but I'll interchange it and call it our private cloud, but it's not really a cloud.

We have several versions. The newest is 8.0.4, and the oldest is 7.4.10. We have six data centers in which Globalscape is deployed. 

How has it helped my organization?

The biggest benefit for me is stability. We have a 100% uptime SLA on our SFTP server because it's probably the most important infrastructure piece in our data center. Without the movement of files, we have no business. It has not crashed in two years.

It provides advanced controls, alerting, and reporting for security and compliance, which is very good. We use the ARM Database module daily. It is a fantastic troubleshooting tool. It is a single point to gather information. The advanced controls, alerting, and reporting features are very important because of the volume of traffic and the number of customers. We have Globalscape deployed in a high availability active cluster. We can't monitor all three nodes at the same time, but the ARM Database can. So, it's very important because of the number of people that access the product at the same time.

Its centralized platform is excellent for the management of file transfer operations. It is important because of the volume of customers going to several thousand different servers across different networks. We're talking about 300,000 to 400,000 files daily going to multiple places, so it's better than having hundreds of servers deployed. It makes it streamlined and manageable.

What is most valuable?

The High Security Module is valuable. It allows for increased security. It allows me to integrate Globalscape with our Active Directory. So, we manage all our customer accounts outside of Globalscape, and it allows us to import them with LDAP queries. It's very convenient. It also gives our customers the confidence that it's a very secure product.

Another outstanding feature of Globalscape is their excellent account management team. They keep lines of communication open. She calls me and tells me about new features in advance. She lets me know about webinars. Without me having to prompt, I will hear from her at least once a month. The quality of service is a 10 out of 10.

What needs improvement?

Instead of using a fat client to access the administrator panel, where you have to install client software on any server that you need to use to access, I would like them to switch to a web-based model where you could connect from anywhere without having to maintain and install the software.

It is not really a complaint, but the weakness of Globalscape is its 32-bit engine. I heard that they're working on a 64-bit engine in the near future, so that's all going to go away. It'll make the product awesome. Right now, it's fantastic.

Globalscape is designed specifically for Windows. That is a handicap, but it is not important. If it ran Linux, we could use it in the public cloud offering. We do have a public cloud offering, but it needs to run on Linux. So, we can't bring Globalscape to our public cloud offering. GoAnywhere is the product that was chosen for the public cloud offering because it runs on Linux.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for 17 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

For the way we use it, the stability is topnotch. It is one of my favorite features being responsible for this. We have a 100% uptime SLA on our SFTP server. It has not crashed in two years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Its horizontal scalability is awesome. We are transferring between 300,000 to 400,000 files daily and about two terabytes on average. It meets our needs, and there is room for growth because we could always expand to a fourth HA node as business increases. 

How are customer service and support?

Their support is excellent. I would give them a 10 out of 10, but we pay for the max support level. They have absolutely met our expectations because they're available 24/7.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Axway. Pricing and licensing were the primary reasons why we switched to Globalscape. Axway is very expensive. It is probably three or four times more expensive than Globalscape. Globalscape's virtual file system functioning met our needs perfectly. This feature was technically available in Axway, but it was so much easier to deploy in Globalscape. Axway is well-established, solid, and very good at what it does, but you need a Ph.D. to understand it. It is very complex. They have a separate guide for engineering and users. 

We use GoAnywhere for the public cloud offering because it runs on Linux. It is solid, but it uses a Java-based engine, and I'm not a big fan of Java. Java inherently brings risk to me in my experience, but it is still a good, solid product. I've not been involved with the pricing of GoAnywhere, but I have to believe it's reasonable because it's deployed in a lot of places in our public cloud.

How was the initial setup?

It was reasonable. It wasn't straightforward, but it wasn't complex either. It's about asking professional services the right questions because I would never install it out of the box. We used the silent install because it's more customizable.

Getting the software installed and everything connected was fast. A three-node HA cluster probably took less than an hour. The migration was not so fast, but that wasn't Globalscape's fault. That was the customers'.

Our implementation strategy was to have an MFT server that was secured and could do file encryption-decryption and move lots of files every day and have lots of connections. It can support a whole lot of connections because we move 300,000 to 400,000 files but probably 600,000 to 700,000 connections daily.

What was our ROI?

We have absolutely realized a return on our investment in Globalscape. I never personally calculated the ROI, but I would say if I compared it to the cost of Axway, the ROI was less than two years. If I compare it with customers, the ROI is probably three or four years. This is just my best guess. I don't sit down and crunch financial numbers. That's not part of my role, but I would say that we absolutely have an excellent ROI.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is much more competitively priced. Axway is probably three or four times more expensive than Globalscape.

I like the server-based license. It's easier to manage than a seat license, which our previous product Axway had. Axway's license model is to charge by the account while Globalscape's model is by the server. It is much simpler and much easier when audit time comes.

What other advice do I have?

It is a solid product. The price point is excellent. I don't know if it's a negative now, but you have to be sure that you know that it only runs on Windows. For some people, it's a negative, and for some people, it's not. To me, it's not.

It can secure sensitive data inside your internal network so that only verified users have access, but we don't use that feature. We have other internal tools that secure the data. We also don't use Globalscape to automate the submission of regulatory documentation.

It allows us to automate scripts, but I don't use it. That's still a work in progress, but for the few that I do have, we use the AWE module. I'm working to integrate PowerShell now. They have simplified executing PowerShell in version 8. So, I should have everything up to version 8 by the middle of next year.

It connects to popular ICAP services to perform antivirus and data loss prevention functions, but we don't use that feature.

It enabled us to reassign resources who were writing custom file transfer scripts or compiling file transfer audit reports to other tasks many years ago, but in my current organization, it has not done that because it was designed as part of the critical core feature of our data center. Similarly, it has not enabled us to decommission other solutions. The data center was built with Globalscape chosen. Before that, it was just changing from one vendor to Globalscape for economic reasons. 

I'm going to give it an eight out of 10 because of the 32-bit engine.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate
Find out what your peers are saying about HelpSystems, Progress Software, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: November 2021.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
AK
Lead Technical Support Engineer at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Allowed us to decommission multiple solutions and streamline and standardize our processes

Pros and Cons

  • "The fact that it is Windows-based was a huge factor for us because most of our endpoints are Windows-based. And the ability to configure it means standardization is available with the product."
  • "I do have some complaints or concerns around the centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations, and I know that they're working towards a better solution there. At its core, it's a good feature, but needs some improvements. I would like to see a web interface so that there is universal support across versions, because we have test and production environments that aren't always in sync. It would be nice to have one administrative interface to access both."

What is our primary use case?

It's our managed file transfer platform that we mainly run for the folder monitor event rules. We've got about 3,000 event rules and about 1,000 users.

How has it helped my organization?

We have regulatory information that flows through it. From a managed file transfer perspective, we move a lot of files and this is just another file transfer for us. But the reporting around compliance has been good for us to ensure that we're moving things securely.

By going with Globalscape, we have been able to decommission Sterling B2B Integrator, Connect Enterprise, MOVEit, and soon, ExaVault, and that has streamlined and standardized our processes, drastically, and has helped with cost savings.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the scheduling and folder monitor capabilities. It fits well with our workflows, as we strive to be event-driven rather than scheduled. Event-driven fits well with folder monitoring.

The fact that it is Windows-based was a huge factor for us because most of our endpoints are Windows-based. And the ability to configure it means standardization is available with the product.

Also, the ARM (Auditing and Reporting Module) database has been a very important feature for us in terms of research and reporting. When a client asks us if their file has been transferred, it's very important that we have that reference. And from the compliance and records-management perspectives, it's great to have all of that information.

The solution’s centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations is also great. The administrative interface is locally installed and remotes to the servers and that is important for us.

There is also the fact that it allows us to use automated scripts. We were doing that in our other platforms as well, but Globalscape has the edge. PowerShell integrates naturally and it has an advanced workflow editor built-in. It has reduced workload to a certain extent, but that just comes down to standards more than anything, and how we implement transfers. I don't know how to put a number on the time saved, but hypothetically it would be about 20 percent.

What needs improvement?

I do have some complaints or concerns around the centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations, and I know that they're working towards a better solution there. At its core, it's a good feature, but needs some improvements. I would like to see a web interface so that there is universal support across versions, because we have test and production environments that aren't always in sync. It would be nice to have one administrative interface to access both.

The other aspect is not to be limited to the configuration of one server at a time, because we have multiple administrators. Someone might want to do work on one of the nodes in our cluster but isn't able to do that because other administrators are leveraging a different node.

Also, as a result of working on different versions of the product, I have found that some of the features that were in older versions have been forgotten in newer versions. One of them is how you copy and paste conditions within event rules, and how they're placed. In an older version, 7.4.13.15, you are able to copy a condition and paste it after the selected condition, but in version 8 and above, when you copy a condition, it has to go at the top of the rule.

The other thing that I can think of is key management. Within the PGP or SSH management console, when adding a key in older versions, that dialogue would refresh and put the new key at the bottom so it was easy to find. In new versions, it does not refresh. You have to exit out of the dialogue and re-enter it and it's not shown at the bottom, so you have to dig for it.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using Globalscape Managed File Transfer for about five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We've had some issues in clustering and with the high-availability functionality, as far as file shares go, but I believe they have been resolved in newer versions.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

As long as it's configured as an HA solution from the get-go, it's very easy to add nodes. If you start it as a standalone server and want to upgrade to a cluster, it is not really great, but that's also on the roadmap already and will hopefully be improved.

The solution has a pretty large footprint within our company, so any increased use would be based on company growth.

How are customer service and support?

In the past, the tech support that we got from Globalscape was very good. As of late, it has been far less impressive in response time, the knowledge of tier-one agents, and the willingness to escalate to tier-two and three. Lately, it's been really disappointing.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Neutral

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We had a few managed file transfer platforms before. One was Sterling B2B Integrator. The Globalscape interface is more user-friendly, but as with anything, once you're familiar with the less user-friendly solutions, they take about the same amount of time to use.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was pretty straightforward, and I know that it has only gotten easier in newer versions.

We used Globalscape's Quick Start Service. It was a learning process, and it took about eight hours because we went through a lot of training as we were doing it.

In terms of an implementation strategy, we had some of our own standards for naming things within the product, but we went with the advice of HelpSystems when it came to resources and infrastructure to be applied.

For maintenance and operations, we have nine FTEs. Their responsibilities include implementing and configuring, troubleshooting and managing/upgrading.

What was our ROI?

The ROI from our early solution, Connect Enterprise, was great. But in comparison to the others, like IBM Sterling File Gateway and Sterling B2B Integrator, the return on investment from Globalscape is far higher. There is a much better return.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

A large factor in our decision to go with Globalscape was the price. Obviously, that's everybody's first go-to.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at a few options, but we already had an instance of Globalscape within the company, one that was used on a much smaller scale, and that's part of what sent us down this path.

The differences really came down to the user interface and scalability.

What other advice do I have?

My advice would be to implement naming standards early for the policies you apply.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate