We performed a comparison between Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management and McAfee Web Protection [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, BitSight, AuditBoard and others in IT Vendor Risk Management."I prefer BitSight due to its patch management capabilities. The score is a valuable feature. I have contacted the customer support through e-mail and their response rate is fast. I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Offers open ports from an external point of view."
"Its customer service team responds quickly."
"The product helps us identify the vulnerabilities of internet-facing applications."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"It's a solution that permits making a granular configuration and it is easier to deploy the same configuration on a lot of devices using the central console. It is the master of the product."
"McAfee Web Protection was a good tool because in the olden days when you had to use a proxy tool when browsing the internet. Today the logic has changed slightly, in the sense your protection's taken onto the cloud. You'll exit a predefined gateway on the cloud before your internet browsing happens and therefore you're secured."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"The solution does what it's meant to do."
"The product is quite an effective firewall."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"It has dependable anti-malware and intrusion prevention features all-in-one package."
"The solution’s benchmarking should be improved."
"Its factor analysis feature could be better."
"At the moment, when the vulnerability score decreases, it remains the same for quite a while, even though issues are resolved in 24 hours."
"There may be room for improvement in the methodology for identifying findings, as occasional errors occur on the technical side."
"Data enrichment is the major issue."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"The solution should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"The solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"We need a better customer experience and more flexibility in the product."
"I'm not sure if the solution itself is cloud-based or not. If it isn't they really need to begin to develop that out a bit."
"The True Key version for mobile phones should be improved. The password manager is not as seamless as on the desktop. Once implemented, on the desktop, when you go to the site, it automatically fills and connects you, whereas, on the mobile phone, it doesn't do that quite seamlessly. You need to open the True Key application and then select the password you want to use. It then opens in the browser. There are fewer steps in the desktop version as compared to the mobile version."
"Lacking filter for spam."
More Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is ranked 2nd in IT Vendor Risk Management with 5 reviews while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in IT Vendor Risk Management with 16 reviews. Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is rated 8.6, while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management writes "User-friendly solution with robust patch management capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is most compared with SecurityScorecard, RiskRecon, Microsoft Secure Score, UpGuard Vendor Risk and Tenable Lumin, whereas McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with .
We monitor all IT Vendor Risk Management 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.