We performed a comparison between Check Point Web Gateway and Symantec Secure Web Gateway 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 solution is stable."
"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."
"It's easy to deploy this tool."
"One of its rather outstanding capabilities is its ability to add an extra layer of protection to our company's internal network."
"The interface is simply amazing."
"I think this solution is very helpful to our customers because its cloud-based security can be deployed quickly and maintained easily."
"It is very stable."
"The most valuable features of Check Point Web Gateway are all the IPS. However, what matters for users is content and web filtering."
"The product covers all the security needs of roaming users."
"Application control allows the administrator to create granular policies based on users to allow, block, or limit access."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"It is a stable solution."
"It is quite scalable. If a user needs to do more deployments, they can just add them."
"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 has a faster implementation process compared to other products."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint security."
"The most valuable features are the website blocking capability and SSL interception."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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"
"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."
"For the most modern versions, there currently is no documentation, or it is more difficult to find it."
"The learning curve is complex for new users."
"The documentation must be improved."
"The support team’s response is not fast."
"Most of the time, we are struggling when it comes to getting support."
"The solution should improve integration."
"We understand that if we want to see greater connections, greater services, and a greater capacity established for primary equipment, this solution needs to evolve to make an application installed directly on equipment."
"It is not user-friendly."
"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."
"Difficult and time-consuming to deploy and update."
"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."
"It's not user-friendly, and we end up making too many phone calls to get things fixed."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"There's a need for increased firewall functionality and capabilities. I'm not seeing a competitive Symantec cloud product. Specifically, functionalities with security as filtering from the cloud. I am aware that there is a product, a proxy in the cloud but I have compared it with other vendors and I don't find it that powerful. I think the worst thing that we're experiencing is very poor and inadequate technical support. It seems to me that tech support engineers aren't qualified to fulfill their job duties."
"The reports could be better."
"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."
Check Point Web Gateway is ranked 12th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 20 reviews while Symantec Secure Web Gateway is ranked 33rd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 10 reviews. Check Point Web Gateway is rated 8.2, while Symantec Secure Web Gateway is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of Check Point Web Gateway writes "Great for limiting, blocking, or allowing access to sites". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Secure Web Gateway writes "Easy to set up with good features and helpful support". Check Point Web Gateway is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Symantec Proxy, Cisco Web Security Appliance and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway, whereas Symantec Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Zscaler Internet Access, Skyhigh Security and Fortinet FortiGate SWG. See our Check Point Web Gateway vs. Symantec Secure Web Gateway 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.