We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and FortiSASE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"Ability to send decrypted traffic to other security solutions for inspection."
"I like the product's scalability and stability."
"Once deployed, the management console is simple and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature for me in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is URL filtering, though all other features of the product are okay as well."
"Most valuable features are content filtering and monitoring."
"Secure Web Gateway's most valuable features are firewall blocking and anti-malware scanning."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category."
"There is some sandboxing available, which is quite useful."
"Deep packet inspection is easier to deploy in the FortiSASE environment. It's much simpler to configure one-touch deployment. It was considerably more convoluted to get that to work using FortiClient. All that processing horsepower is happening in Fortinet's cloud infrastructure, reducing the load on our local routers and on-prem FortiGate firewalls."
"The integration with the company's existing security infrastructure enhanced our security posture since it was a straightforward process."
"I feel that it is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The product can scale."
"The solution is easy to deploy and simple to manage."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"I have been in contact with technical support several times, and I am not happy with them."
"The Sandbox solution should be integrated with the NIST to handle whatever new vulnerabilities or new sites are identified as potential threats."
"The solution should be better able to support itself and operate faster. Sometimes the technical support team takes too long to respond."
"To access the root of the product for troubleshooting you must have a data engineer. This is the big issue with Forcepoint. The support community is not good."
"The product needs to have more mobility."
"Sometimes attacks or a new ransomware gets through."
"It has a problem with tablets and the iPhone. It's not filtering on these platforms. It filters on Windows but not iOS or Android."
"The deployment is a bit complex and it requires expertise to deploy, which is something that should be improved and made easier to do."
"Security and support are two areas with certain shortcomings in the product where improvements are required."
"The GUI and connectivity, along with the support offered, are some of the areas of concern in the product where improvements are required."
"FortiSASE is a work in progress. One area where there is room for improvement is the ability to use FortiSASE on an endpoint that doesn't have the client on it. Other solutions do that by building a VPN tunnel from their on-prem router into the SASE environment. FortiSASE doesn't have that feature yet, but it is on the roadmap for Q3 of this year. I've seen it in their development environment."
"They need to have more concise or precise ways to come up with the return on investment for convincing or presenting this to customers."
"Some of the solution's back-end connectivity and visibility are not robust and could be improved."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 5th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 47 reviews while FortiSASE is ranked 14th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 5 reviews. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8, while FortiSASE is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway writes "Simple to set up, reliable, and offers great reporting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FortiSASE writes "An easy to deploy and simple to manage solution that can be used for remote worker access". Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Fortinet FortiProxy and Fortinet FortiGate SWG, whereas FortiSASE is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange and Cato SASE Cloud Platform. See our Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs. FortiSASE report.
We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.