We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and FortiCache [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about TitanHQ, Forcepoint, Barracuda Networks and others in Web Content Filtering."Real-time analytics."
"The most valuable feature for me in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is URL filtering, though all other features of the product are okay as well."
"Most valuable features are content filtering and monitoring."
"There is some sandboxing available, which is quite useful."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category."
"I have found the simplicity of the solution valuable. The dashboard and reports are good as well."
"Real-time category protection."
"It's stable and reliable."
"It has a nice graphic interface and it is easy to find information about effectively using the product because of the large user-base."
"I like the traffic monitoring because it meets the firewall protocols."
"We think it's a good solution for cloud security, where one has hybrid cloud. They have different cloud solutions like a Office 365 or Azure or Amazon. This is a good solution to control all the different cloud solutions you have in your family of hybrid clouds, from one panel. This is what the main feature we look for."
"A room for improvement in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is the support it offers. It's very bad. What I'd like to see in the next release of the product is for it to be less complicated because at the moment Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is more complicated than other products. Sometimes issues come up that you can't solve without the support team. For example, you should write the root password to fix the issue. In the next release of the product, it would be good if it had an easy-to-use interface. Troubleshooting issues in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway should be less complicated as well."
"The initial setup can be complex."
"To access the root of the product for troubleshooting you must have a data engineer. This is the big issue with Forcepoint. The support community is not good."
"The reporting could be improved."
"There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve."
"The deployment is a bit complex and it requires expertise to deploy, which is something that should be improved and made easier to do."
"It has a problem with tablets and the iPhone. It's not filtering on these platforms. It filters on Windows but not iOS or Android."
"The documentation is almost too much, it could be laid out in an easier to understand."
"Sometimes when using high availability, the second firewall does not come up immediately if the first one goes down."
"It should be set up more specifically so that I only pay for what I want."
"However, we would like them to add more integrations. We would appreciate a more open solution. They're quite good when you have the entire Fortinet ecosystem, but otherwise it's not as good of a solution."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Content Filtering with 47 reviews while FortiCache [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Web Content Filtering. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8, while FortiCache [EOL] 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 FortiCache [EOL] writes "Has high-availability for managing web caching, filtering and security through a user-friendly interface". Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Fortinet FortiGate SWG and Fortinet FortiProxy, whereas FortiCache [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Web Content Filtering vendors.
We monitor all Web Content Filtering 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.