Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs Netskope comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

iboss
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (7th), Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (2nd)
Netskope
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (3rd), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway3.6%
Cisco Umbrella15.1%
Zscaler Internet Access13.3%
Other68.0%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Netskope14.7%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks14.8%
Cisco Umbrella11.2%
Other59.3%
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
reviewer1047669 - PeerSpot reviewer
PS & Technical Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Has faced usability challenges while managing integrated components
We are working with web gateway and full endpoint security. URL filter is a notable feature. While it is not specifically related to Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway alone, if you have the complete Forcepoint solution, it can integrate with other Forcepoint products, such as DLP solution and email gateway. The URL filter of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is good for web gateway. Clients and consumers do not prefer it because the interface is not good. When using FSM with DLP, web gateway, and email gateway, upgrades cannot be performed simultaneously since Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway might need an upgrade while email gateway does not, despite having the same manager controlling them. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway works well with banking and small companies. Email gateway is less needed as everything is moving to the cloud.
AV
Cyber security consultant at L&T Technology Services
User-friendly console integrates robust security features for seamless traffic management
Netskope serves as a single web console carrying out multiple functionalities: Zero Trust Network Architecture (ZTNA), Secure Web Gateway (SWG), Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB), Web DLP, and firewall services. I can toggle between these features on a single platform, enhancing ease of use. In comparison, Zscaler requires multiple consoles for managing similar features. Having these functionalities integrated into one dashboard makes Netskope efficient and user-friendly.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"The initial setup is easy. It's not difficult."
"Real-time category protection."
"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 GUI is quite nice."
"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."
"There is some sandboxing available, which is quite useful."
"Email Sandbox, DLP and Proxy."
"The customization and control of URL filtering and the integration with other Forcepoint solutions are great features."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"We use Cisco VPN for remote access. Additionally, we have started implementing Netskope with a strong focus on security. Our primary goal is to protect users from accessing malicious sites. We also plan to implement DLP based on our data, as data security is our main concern."
"I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is protection."
"A very straightforward interface."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is that it is a SaaS-delivered solution."
"It's one of the top-ranking solutions in the market, and it's very responsive. We are using Netskope, and Netskope provides a load of features for SQL, STP, and traffic control."
"Netskope has positively impacted our organization by securing all our systems, and the response time is also less, with a high catch rate for any incident."
 

Cons

"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"The technical support needs to be improved."
"I would suggest focusing on improving the GUI's stability, especially when implementing new filters or patches."
"The availability of clusters is limited, and the product is very unstable. The development team is slow as well."
"They are gearing towards a cloud-based platform for easier management and implementation."
"Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway could be improved by offering a SaaS-based service, which is increasingly being adopted in the market. They need to enhance their CASB solutions since currently, the cloud index support is low compared to competitors."
"But the deployment could be easier. It might take from one day to three days. Usually, that involves an engineer from the vendor and a working team at the enterprise."
"There are several issues with the product. Version 8.4 can only be managed with a CLI, they removed the nice GUI interface from version 8.1. The load-balancing needs massive improvements. The incident lists don’t sync between appliances, they need to be manually edited for each one."
"The initial setup can be complex."
"Netskope needs to improve its stability."
"I would like to have an identity theft protection function."
"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"
"There is currently no DLP on-premises."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"In terms of improvements, the possibility to export the dashboards or the data directly to Power BI would be better."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"The right categorization of websites needs improvement. It is important for the solution to correctly categorize websites as genuine or non-genuine, fitting them into the right category."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The price of this solution is reasonable."
"The solution's pricing is competitive."
"It is quite expensive."
"The solution is priced a little high compare to similar solutions."
"The price of this product should be reduced to make it more competitive."
"The pricing for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is expensive. You pay per user and functionality. I'd rate it a four on a scale of one to ten."
"The licensing is not expensive."
"Overall, I am not aware of the option to pay for one time use of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway."
"The pricing is competitive."
"The price is in the middle range compared to other solutions."
"I would rate the pricing nine out of ten."
"The pricing is very flexible."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"Netskope's pricing is reasonable compared to Microsoft."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
879,425 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
What do you like most about Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
The product's user management is an area where my company does not face any challenges.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
I would rate pricing for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway a two out of ten. It's really expensive.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is not endpoint security. If we have a chance to change, we would change it because it ...
Which is better, Zscaler internet access or Netsckope CASB?
We researched Netskope but ultimately chose Zscaler. Netskope is a cloud access security broker that helps identify ...
What do you like most about Netskope CASB?
The product's analytics part is pretty fine.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Forcepoint SWG, Websense Web Security, Forcepoint TRITON
Netskope CASB
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Adventist Health, Alphawest, Amadori, Anoka County, Compartamos Banco, Davies Turner, EverBank, iGATE, Karlstad Municipality, Lake Michigan Credit Union, Scavolini, Smurfit Kappa, Toyota
NetApp, Genomic Health, Caterpillar, Apollo, Pandora, Continental Resources, Fractal, infinera, Tesla
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Fortinet, Zscaler and others in Secure Web Gateways (SWG). Updated: December 2025.
879,425 professionals have used our research since 2012.