We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Netskope 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)."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."
"The most valuable feature is the categorization, where you can allow general access to an application but limit specific features."
"Secure Web Gateway's most valuable features are firewall blocking and anti-malware scanning."
"The product's user management is an area where my company does not face any challenges."
"There is some sandboxing available, which is quite useful."
"The GUI is quite nice."
"Provides good visibility and good filtering features."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"SWG allows me to track internet usage patterns, helping optimize bandwidth and understand how much time each employee spends online."
"Their technical support is very good."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"It is a very scalable tool."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"It's a comprehensive security portfolio solution."
"It has hundreds of features and many of them are useful."
"Netskope's control is user-friendly and comprehensible. It also helps in conveying information effectively as a company, making it crucial for customer satisfaction."
"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."
"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."
"It's the support that's the problem because that's a different question from the product itself — it's the Achilles heel."
"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."
"The initial setup was complex."
"I would suggest focusing on improving the GUI's stability, especially when implementing new filters or patches."
"The technical support team's response time could be improved."
"In the on-premises version, I don't like the deployment and structuring of the device."
"An area for improvement would be the classification of websites - it can take a long time for new websites to be classified."
"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."
"In terms of improvements, enhancing support, particularly for OEM support with quicker response times would be beneficial."
"The initial setup is complex and should be simplified."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"It should have user behavior analysis and diverse analysis."
"The dashboard performance could be much better and faster, but because it is a complicated product, it takes time for the dashboard to process."
"If we need to allow a process that is blocked by Netskope, we have to manually check the logs to see why it is blocked. This can be time-consuming and inefficient"
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"They could improve their mobile agents as they have some limitations."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 6th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 47 reviews while Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8, while Netskope is rated 8.4. 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 Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Fortinet FortiProxy and Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection, whereas Netskope is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Perimeter 81.
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.