We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

What needs improvement with Symantec Secure Web Gateway?


Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Symantec Secure Web Gateway.

What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?

ITCS user
55 Answers

author avatar
Top 10Real User

The major challenge is their support. The support from Broadcom is quite poor. It takes forever for them to get back to you, and when they get back to you, they ask you for so much information, which makes it more difficult. That's the only problem I have with Broadcom. This is one of the reasons why we are switching to another solution. Another reason for switching is that we have a plan to adopt solutions in the cloud so that we can offload the administration efforts to the vendor. In future releases, they can improve its reporting and the process for rules creation. They can also improve Broadcom on things such as security information and event management so that from my same platform, I can carry out functions and probably block websites. Such a feature would be nice. Currently, Broadcom is integrated with McAfee to block access to certain sites automatically. It would be nice if they can expand their integration to IBM Resilient Security Orchestration and Automation Response.

author avatar
Top 5Real User

The interface could be made more user-friendly. As it is, we have trouble when we want to do certain operations, such as choosing when and what we want to block or allow. For example, we don't want to block WhatsApp, but we do want to block uploads. This means that we have to enter some codes. It's not like you can just drag and drop, as we have seen in other security solutions. Another example is on the main page. When you're logged into the device using HTTPS, you still have to go to another link to access the policy manager. When you are redirected to another function, it loads very slowly.

author avatar
Top 10Real User

There are definitely considerable problems with this solution. Most notably, compared to Cisco Umbrella it was a lot more difficult to deploy. The deployment process should definitely be significantly simplified. The service pack file system should also be improved or even abandoned. The way the packed files are set up could definitely be better and maybe they do not have to be deployed that way at all. There are better solutions which is demonstrated by the fact that other products and companies no longer handle updates this way. They do it in a way that is easier to handle.

author avatar
Top 10Consultant

They should have a tool to help with the deployment. It is needed to point all the clients to the proxy. I don't think either vendor has a deployment tool as such. Also, Zscaler has something called the Zscaler Internet Access which also acts as a signin box on the next-generation firewall. WSS doesn't do this.

author avatar
Real User

One of the problems with using Symantec is that it's widely known and the people who are making malware have designed to circumvent it. You have to keep that in mind. The other thing that I find is a weakness is that it doesn't give you a statement so you don't have an ability to really test something to see if something's suspicious because if it is, it might have a payload that could disable Symantec and get through it. I'm always more concerned about that. This is one of the reasons we separate it from our Comodo. It needs to be easier to set up rules for what sites it should allow or not allow us in certain areas of our computer for programs. It would also be nice really nice to have it give you better information about what it's finding. A lot of the alerts we get are very difficult to understand what it's actually telling you. It's too generic.

Learn what your peers think about Symantec Secure Web Gateway. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2021.
541,108 professionals have used our research since 2012.