We performed a comparison between Cisco Web Security Appliance and NetScaler Secure Web Gateway [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks and others in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)."The solution is stable."
"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 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."
"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 solution provides good web reputation and anti-malware protection."
"The most valuable feature is security."
"Cisco Web Security Appliance is user-friendly and easy to manage. It protects your environment while accessing the internet."
"Great for assisting with connections to networks or apps."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"I would recommend this solution to others."
"Cisco regularly upgrades features for the customer's security requirements."
"The product is stable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is dual authentication, which is good from a security perspective."
"From my point of view, this solution is stable and we haven't had any real issues."
"It is absolutely stable."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It should have a user-based quota, per-user quota, that can be defined on the appliance."
"The support for this solution could be improved. We have experienced issues with their SMARTnet support system."
"We would like to see a security service head, where we can combine all the security into one solution."
"The solution needs to be more user-friendly and easier to navigate."
"The transparent proxy is quite difficult to enforce on smartphones and tablets."
"The tool needs to provide logs. They need to improve firewall threat defense."
"They need a better graphical interface, and they need a better ISE mechanism."
"The one thing I don't like about Cisco is that they are very much fragmented in terms of providing the complete solution. They keep on breaking their different feature sets into different boxes."
"It would be helpful if this solution would collect information about people who are connecting from external devices so that we can rate their user experience in using the virtual desktops."
"I would like to see more monitoring, and there could always be deeper information to find out where issues are."
"In terms of improvement, it should be easier to manage. We have a small team and don't have much expertise, we need things that are easy to manage."
More NetScaler Secure Web Gateway [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco Web Security Appliance is ranked 10th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 29 reviews while NetScaler Secure Web Gateway [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Secure Web Gateways (SWG). Cisco Web Security Appliance is rated 7.8, while NetScaler Secure Web Gateway [EOL] is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Web Security Appliance writes "Ensures security for remote workers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetScaler Secure Web Gateway [EOL] writes "A stable web access solution and reverse proxy that is secured with dual authentication". Cisco Web Security Appliance is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiProxy, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway, whereas NetScaler Secure Web Gateway [EOL] is most compared with .
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.