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."Offers open ports from an external point of view."
"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."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Its customer service team responds quickly."
"The product helps us identify the vulnerabilities of internet-facing applications."
"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 most valuable is the blocking of blacklisted sites, a URL that is, either by intelligence or by McAfee, detected as a malicious site."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"It is functional. It has reduced risk and downtime while also ensuring regulatory compliance, which is critical."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"The most valuable feature is the ease in the configuration for security roles."
"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."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"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."
"The solution’s benchmarking should be improved."
"Its factor analysis feature could be better."
"Data enrichment is the major issue."
"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 solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"The initial setup could be simplified, there is a learning curve during the implementation."
"The manufacturerers should have more transparancy about exactly what is getting filtered when you use the product and why."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"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."
"There is a real need to make sure all the updates and improvements are in order to keep the security at top performance to continue defeating threats that come daily."
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 Cisco Umbrella and Zscaler Internet Access.
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.