We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Trustwave WebMarshal [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."
"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 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 stable and reliable."
"Giving visibility to people's actions in the network, while keeping attackers out: across data centers, offices, branches, and the cloud."
"In terms of functionality, Forcepoint is the best web proxy available."
"Secure Web Gateway's most valuable features are firewall blocking and anti-malware scanning."
"Real-time analytics."
"Once deployed, the management console is simple and easy to use."
"In terms of performance, Forcepoint stands out because it is more scalable than any other solution. It can extend to different types of boxes and integrate well with other platforms and vendors. And it doesn't need to have the same kind of box or throughput to have high availability."
"Ability to send decrypted traffic to other security solutions for inspection."
"The setup was fairly straightforward. It's just a proxy."
"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."
"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"
"Overall the software is occupying too much memory space. If they could remedy that, it would be a better experience, because today Windows is occupying too much memory space as well (in terms of the RAM), and this software has also started occupying all the memory. Due to this, I have less space for my other office products and data. I can't, for example, operate a huge Excel sheet or other datasets."
"The reporting could be improved."
"Stability needs some improvement, we have on occasion experienced some delay when it is synchronized."
"Reports in the sand-boxing, ease of deployment of sensors to ready to go server with one click of a button."
"The Sandbox solution should be integrated with the NIST to handle whatever new vulnerabilities or new sites are identified as potential threats."
"I would suggest focusing on improving the GUI's stability, especially when implementing new filters or patches."
"Sometimes attacks or a new ransomware gets through."
"The initial setup can be complex."
"There's no cloud proxy solution. It's purely on premise, it's a cell inspection, but it doesn't allow any sandboxing. It also doesn't do any tunneling inspection or anything like that."
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 6th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 47 reviews while Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Secure Web Gateways (SWG). Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8, while Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] is rated 3.0. 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 Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] writes "No support for cloud or large scale". Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Fortinet FortiProxy and Fortinet FortiGate SWG, whereas Trustwave WebMarshal [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.