We performed a comparison between Symantec Secure Web Gateway and Zscaler Internet Access 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 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."
"The solution is stable."
"It has a faster implementation process compared to other products."
"It is a stable solution."
"In terms of most valuable features, I like the ICAP capability and URL filtering the most."
"It is easy to manage. The graphical user interface is quite easy to navigate, and we don't have any difficulty in using it. It is a good solution."
"It is quite scalable. If a user needs to do more deployments, they can just add them."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint security."
"It's nice to have it in the cloud where we can pull the reporting together for it so we can see what's happening in machines at different locations."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"The scanning feature is impressive, because they do not introduce a big latency to the traffic."
"The solution is scalable and stable."
"For our needs, the cloud-native proxy architecture is a very good solution. We are moving away from on-prem appliances and moving more toward cloud-based solutions. Zscaler is a good fit for our strategy. This architecture helps with cyber threats because we inspect most of the traffic and we can see that a lot of threats are stopped directly in the secure web gateway."
"SSL inspection is a valuable feature."
"Zscaler Internet Access's roaming user feature is most valuable and is much better compared to other secure web gateways."
"The solution has reduced cyberattacks."
"All internet access flows through the Zscaler proxy, regardless of whether people are in office or remote. I have greater control site access and I minimize the number of compromises that we experience to almost none."
"Whether you are in a hotel somewhere, or in Africa, it does not matter. You will get the Zscaler protection presence anywhere."
"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."
"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"
"The reports could be better."
"The platform’s data center is not capable of managing most of the traffic."
"It needs to be easier to set up rules for what sites it should allow or not allow us in certain areas of our computer for programs. It would also be nice really nice to have it give you better information about what it's finding. A lot of the alerts we get are very difficult to understand what it's actually telling you. It's too generic."
"Depending on the severity of the issue, I think they can be a bit slow - a few days for the low severity cases, but for the severe cases normally they contact you back in a couple of hours."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"It's not user-friendly, and we end up making too many phone calls to get things fixed."
"The major challenge is their support. The support from Broadcom is quite poor. It takes forever for them to get back to you, and when they get back to you, they ask you for so much information, which makes it more difficult. That's the only problem I have with Broadcom. This is one of the reasons why we are switching to another solution. Another reason for switching is that we have a plan to adopt solutions in the cloud so that we can offload the administration efforts to the vendor. In future releases, they can improve its reporting and the process for rules creation. They can also improve Broadcom on things such as security information and event management so that from my same platform, I can carry out functions and probably block websites. Such a feature would be nice. Currently, Broadcom is integrated with McAfee to block access to certain sites automatically. It would be nice if they can expand their integration to IBM Resilient Security Orchestration and Automation Response."
"Difficult and time-consuming to deploy and update."
"Sometimes, support isn't available."
"It needs better integration with other applications. It takes a fair amount of regular activity to apply the by-passes because it is very strict in its restrictions and frequently you have to go in and open things up to allow the workforce to work."
"Zscaler Internet Access could improve by adding a VPN feature."
"One thing that they could improve is the ability to import rules from other platforms."
"Technical support could be better."
"What could be improved in Zscaler Internet Access is its price. It could be cheaper."
"The solution can be improved by advancing some of the newer technologies such as the DLP feature, and adding email security."
"We'd like for them to include some sort of antivirus tool."
Symantec Secure Web Gateway is ranked 32nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 10 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 46 reviews. Symantec Secure Web Gateway is rated 6.6, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Symantec Secure Web Gateway writes "Easy to set up with good features and helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". Symantec Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Skyhigh Security and Fortinet FortiGate SWG, whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and FortiSASE . See our Symantec Secure Web Gateway vs. Zscaler Internet Access report.
See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.
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.