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."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 most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The solution is stable."
"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 initial setup is not complex."
"Email Sandbox, DLP and Proxy."
"The customization and control of URL filtering and the integration with other Forcepoint solutions are great features."
"In terms of functionality, Forcepoint is the best web proxy available."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category."
"For the most part, the solution, when set up correctly, works fine."
"The spam filter is very effective."
"The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Web Security is creating the easy to install further policies that are deployed through the Forcepoint security manual at some stage. Just drag and drop and the policies are there."
"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 solution is easy to deploy and simple to manage."
"The product can scale."
"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 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"
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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."
"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."
"We have a lot of false positives, which is one area that can be improved."
"In the on-premises version, I don't like the deployment and structuring of the device."
"The reporting could be improved."
"There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve."
"The firewall doesn't have any features because some customers are requesting they will install the firewall without licensing. At this time we cannot go further without licensing. Licensing is a must with Forcepoint Web Security firewalls."
"Stability needs some improvement, we have on occasion experienced some delay when it is synchronized."
"I'd like to see the solution improve the banded optimization to offer more bandwidth control, similar to what is on offer with Blue Coat."
"There are several issues with the product. Version 8.4 can only be managed with a CLI, they removed the nice GUI interface from version 8.1. The load-balancing needs massive improvements. The incident lists don’t sync between appliances, they need to be manually edited for each one."
"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."
"Security and support are two areas with certain shortcomings in the product where improvements are required."
"Some of the solution's back-end connectivity and visibility are not robust and could be improved."
"The GUI and connectivity, along with the support offered, are some of the areas of concern in the product where improvements are required."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 6th 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, Cato SASE Cloud Platform and iboss. 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.