Choose from several options for complete web, email and data security.
Learn more
Evaluate Websense products by watching demos and installing evaluation software.
Learn how Websense solutions help keep our customer safe, secure and productive
Get information on product updates, support resources and more.
Get the most out of support in five simple steps.
Find tools and assets to help sell Websense solutions.
Come work for the global leader in unified information security. Go
I am trying to produce a detailed investigative report that reflects a users internet activity using the measure of IBT rather than hits. I run a summary inverstegative report for a user that shows a browse time of 00:24:33 over two days. If I switch to a measure of Hits then the same report shows around 6000 hits.
When I click on the bar to produce a detailed report the detailed report shows the number of hits but not the IBT, that's irrespective of whether the summary report I want to expand has been created using the measure of Hits or IBT.
Is it possible to produce a detailed investigative report of a users internet activity based on IBT rather than hits?
Hi ,
I think you did correct to get an IBT report .
Internet browse time aggregate all of the browsing activity and report it based on how long you spend the time on a particular website. - In simplest term, when you open a page (e.g. www.cnn.com) it will stamp the log with the Read time stamp. - When you click away from the site above, it will stamp the log with the Last read time. - It will combine all of the time you spent in that page into one calculation and reported as one session. - This session then aggregated with other sessions and reported as the total internet browse time.
The different with the Bandwidth and Hits are: Bandwidth and hits will display all URLs that was requested to build the page www.cnn.com while internet browse time will only display how long do you spend in www.cnn.com (session). Because of that you will see more URLs in the Bandwidth and Hits that will not show up in the Internet Browse Time.
Here is another KB which will explain How IBT works:
http://www.websense.com/support/article/t-kbarticle/Internet-Browse-Time-Reports-How-do-they-work
Phil
Yes, I'm frustrated at the same issue, and too, cannot find a way to produce a detailed user report which shows each URL accessed with corresponding date/time and the associated IBT. As Duffer says, it changes it to hits which is of little use to a manager
Total Duffer: Is it possible to produce a detailed investigative report of a users internet activity based on IBT rather than hits?
JACOB SLOAN, CCNA, WCSE
Thanks for the reply J Sloan, that seems to nail the issue. I must say though that I think this shows Triton and Websense in a very poor light.
Being able to report on users browse time as opposed to hits must be one of the most obvious and commonly requested uses of Triton. Most managers would want just that information once they understand that hits shows a lot of background activity not initiated by the user.
How many of us have the time or knowledge required to write our own SQL queries and do "on the fly" IBT generation? Not many of us I would guess.
Why can't Websense develop this functionality so that it's easy for managers to run such a report?
Websense Reporter in version 6.x did this. It was a thick client that was installed on customer's servers and/or workstations. It was slow, and customers frequently opted to use Websense Explorer over Reporter because of the lenghty time it took to create these types of reports. Those customers didn't mind the loss of the detailed IBT analysis because time was valuable in getting the reports to management.
Thin clients such as web-based reporting engines simply do not have the power to do on-the-fly IBT calculations. It would cause the web engine to bog down and fail to serve pages, giving you the impression that the Triton server failed. Instead, we run the IBT job nightly to calculate and pre-stage that information for quick consumption later when you pull the report. That's why detailed analysis is not possible in the current implementations of the product. It is a sacrifice to offer functionality than risk problems resulting from inadequate hardware required to do the on-the-fly analysis.
