We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and McAfee Web Protection [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, Forcepoint and others in Internet Security."Most valuable features are content filtering and monitoring."
"Ease of updating the latest hotfixes and patches on the appliance."
"I like the product's scalability and stability."
"The policies are category-based, so knowledge of another content URL is not compulsory."
"The Forcepoint client software can be downloaded on a user's machine so that it can filter the sites from home or the office. That's one of the biggest features. We can use it for filtering our laptops for our users at any place."
"Real-time category protection."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category."
"It has got a really good URL categorization database. It is simple to set up. It is also easy to use and quite intuitive. It has got a nice utility for troubleshooting."
"It is functional. It has reduced risk and downtime while also ensuring regulatory compliance, which is critical."
"The product is quite an effective firewall."
"The most valuable features of McAfee Web Protection are the reporter, and you have the option to have an agent installed in the notebooks or on the mobiles. You are able to have the same policies inside and outside of your organization which is a benefit."
"The solution is not too expensive. It's affordable."
"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 solution does what it's meant to do."
"The most valuable is the blocking of blacklisted sites, a URL that is, either by intelligence or by McAfee, detected as a malicious site."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"The product could be improved by including a consolidated product that can carry on Forcepoint product email, web, and DLP."
"The technical support team's response time could be improved."
"The reporting could be improved."
"A feature we wish to see addressed in the next release of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway involves its administration."
"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."
"Ease of use could be improved."
"What's missing in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is a specific level of micro-control on protocols or devices, for example, where you can control a particular user or user device."
"The solution should be better able to support itself and operate faster. Sometimes the technical support team takes too long to respond."
"The manufacturerers should have more transparancy about exactly what is getting filtered when you use the product and why."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"We need a better customer experience and more flexibility in the product."
"The solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"Lacking filter for spam."
"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."
"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."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 3rd in Internet Security with 47 reviews while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Internet Security with 16 reviews. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8, while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2. 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 McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Fortinet FortiProxy and Fortinet FortiGate SWG, whereas McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Internet Security vendors and best Web Content Filtering vendors.
We monitor all Internet Security 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.