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, TitanHQ and others in Internet Security."The initial setup is easy. It's not difficult."
"Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway does most of its job well, but I especially like its data security feature."
"The solution’s administration is easy."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category."
"Most valuable features are content filtering and monitoring."
"It's stable and reliable."
"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."
"The solution provided our organization with easy and secure internet access."
"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."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"It is functional. It has reduced risk and downtime while also ensuring regulatory compliance, which is critical."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"The solution is not too expensive. It's affordable."
"The solution does what it's meant to do."
"The product is quite an effective firewall."
"A feature we wish to see addressed in the next release of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway involves its administration."
"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 product could be improved by including a consolidated product that can carry on Forcepoint product email, web, and DLP."
"The reporting must be improved."
"Ease of use could be improved."
"The Sandbox solution should be integrated with the NIST to handle whatever new vulnerabilities or new sites are identified as potential threats."
"Database synchronization failures"
"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."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"Lacking filter for spam."
"The solution should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"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."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"The manufacturerers should have more transparancy about exactly what is getting filtered when you use the product and why."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 4th 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.