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

Appgate SDP vs Forcepoint ONE comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

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
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
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 (8th)
Appgate SDP
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
15th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
ZTNA as a Service (13th), ZTNA (10th), Microsegmentation Software (7th)
Forcepoint ONE
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (19th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.0%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Appgate SDP is 1.8%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint ONE is 1.4%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
iboss2.0%
Forcepoint ONE1.4%
Appgate SDP1.8%
Other94.8%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
IgnitiusMolepo - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps us manage traffic-related issues and streamlines access management for the network
Appgate SDP has significantly streamlined our access management, providing a notably efficient solution compared to traditional VPNs. The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort, unlike VPNs which often involve waiting for connection handling and unblocking. Recognizing the robustness of SDP, we made strategic decisions to minimize reliance on VPNs, reserving only two for administrative purposes. In a scenario where Appgate SDP significantly improved our network security posture, the platform played a crucial role in fortifying defenses against major threats. The encryption algorithms utilized by SDP provide a high level of security to our network architecture. Compared to Cisco, SDP proves to be most critical in protecting resources with the help of role-based policies. It only provides selective access to the application. The dynamic policy engine significantly enhances our access control mechanisms. It has single sign-on and multifactor authentication features. It makes processes faster and easier. It has helped our IT team to manage the workload with ease. It gives an intelligent solution whenever they face traffic-related problems. I rate it a nine out of ten.
Edwin Eze-Osiago - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to deploy, stable, and scalable
Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement. Currently, the solution is not compatible with Azure AD for third-party authentication. The fraud proxy in the SmartEdge agent is not compatible with Forcepoint DLP or a web hybrid agent. I would like the developers to consolidate multiple agents across systems for better integration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."
"The interface is really friendly. It's simple to understand."
"The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort."
"The flexibility of the tool is valuable. It is very robust. It has a very robust configuration capability."
"One of the most important features is stopping lateral movement across our network."
"It is pretty stable."
"It is a scalable solution...The support answers your questions very fast."
"The most valuable features of Forcepoint include Zero Trust Network Access and remote user protection for private applications."
"By default without a policy, Bitglass has the capability to notify the admin of multiple or simultaneous logins across a wide range of geographical regions."
"Forcepoint ONE is okay for me, and I find it a very good solution. Its most valuable feature is monitoring. Its monitoring is very good, and it can communicate with a SIEM system. I also find the DLP feature of Forcepoint ONE good."
"The solution is very good when it comes to securing us against data leakage, because of the other proxy. It also has API scanning or data at rest. It inspects data in motion, which is the proxy, and then it has the data at rest, which is the API scanning. We can inspect for anything we want: file fingerprinting, PHI-sensitive data, PCI-sensitive data. It does not matter. We can usually find it and block it in transit and do our remediation with it. It could either be block, encrypt, or allow and watermark the file to follow it and see where it goes. It allows for those different scenarios."
"The most valuable feature was the website blocking capability, which allowed me to quickly block any dodgy websites."
"The setup is relatively straightforward."
"The solution’s AJAX-VM provides constant reverse proxy uptime. It has been very positive for our security operations. When people are trying to access the SaaS solution, it protects us from downloading any of that data and experiencing any type of attacks"
"We are able to verify what is getting saved out onto the cloud. It allows us to have some DLP rules, since we have to be HIPAA compliant. If some personal health information has been uploaded to Office 365, then we are able to detect that sort of thing and account for it. We have set up rules to prevent people from doing that."
 

Cons

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"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."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"One limitation is that it's harder to provide access to multiple applications in the company with Appgate, but that's probably because of poor management."
"On the cloud, when you make some changes, it may be difficult."
"One thing that kind of sticks out to me is the ability to do a proper non-split tunnel. VPN tunnel-wise, it is not really a true unsplit tunnel, but I think that's just because of the way it's designed. A split VPN basically allows your system to talk to other systems without being forced down the tunnel. A VPN running in a non-split tunnel mode forces all the traffic down the tunnel to wherever you're VPNing to. It forces the traffic down so that the traffic is subject to the firewall and rules that you have in your corporate environment and such. It helps to prevent remote malicious folks that may be talking directly to that box from piggybacking into the corporate environment through it. They do it partially, but it would be nice to see more of an enterprise-level solution there."
"They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features to enhance remote micro connection."
"It would be better to connect to an application portal from any device. Documentation and support could be better."
"The user interface should be improved as it is not very easy to work with the updates."
"I wish they would advance more into the endpoint DLP solution. Currently they do not do anything around endpoint, they're still strictly cloud-based. The forward proxy is really the only thing they do. What I would like to see them do is to scan machines, workstations and servers, for information we might not want on those machines. That would be huge."
"Areas for improvement for the platform include addressing scalability and architecture concerns, especially for large deployments involving more than 500 or 1,000 users."
"Their new SASE (secure access service edge) product would have been the one thing I would have requested. Now that they have that platform, I'd like to see it as integrated and seamless as possible with the core product. That's what they're working towards and that's where we're seeing the advancements."
"I need control over access to web WhatsApp, which the solution cannot resolve yet."
"Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement."
"The solution's integration with other products needs improvement."
"One area for improvement in Forcepoint ONE is that you'll need more training to install the solution yourself. I practiced in a laboratory and I needed more technical information to do the installation."
"In our environment, when an Active Directory password changes, we tend to have some latency issues with access. It takes about 15 minutes before that password is accessible through Bitglass after the change. That would be the major thing I see as a negative."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"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."
"It is a pretty expensive tool. It is maybe about $20,000 per year for a hundred users or so."
"The pricing is according to the market price. It is not a very cheap solution. They have some very aggressive promotions to sell the product in the market."
"We pay $100 per user per month. One license for the site is around $17."
"When considering only the cost, the solution may appear to be costly; however, when evaluated in terms of commercial value, Bitglass is not expensive."
"The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three."
"The licensing cost for Forcepoint ONE would depend on the features, but the pricing is very competitive here in Brazil. The solution offers a good price, and I would rate it a three or a four in terms of pricing. I don't have information on whether there are additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees for Forcepoint ONE."
"There is training involved. If you're going to add more people to it, such as cross train more of your group, there's a cost. Other than that, that's it. We have paid exactly what the invoices have said. We signed a three-year contract and not gone above it."
"Typically, the longer you price forward, the better off you're going to be. They have been very willing to work with us on pricing."
"We have our pricing by user. We do our pricing agreements annually. There are also additional costs for maintenance."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

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 Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise10
 

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 Appgate SDP?
The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can ...
What needs improvement with Appgate SDP?
They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features ...
What is your primary use case for Appgate SDP?
We use Appgate SDP as a substitute for traditional VPN.
What do you like most about Forcepoint ONE?
The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint ONE?
The licensing and pricing were fine with no issues. I took over from somebody else, and it stayed as it was until we ...
What needs improvement with Forcepoint ONE?
There is room for improvement in making the reporting closer to real-time, ideally around five or ten minutes instead...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
Bitglass
 

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.
United States Air Force  FINRA Weight Watchers Rackspace  DataDog SageNet  Verdant Norwegian Cruise Line  VoiceBase  The Third Floor 
UNC-Charlotte
Find out what your peers are saying about Appgate SDP vs. Forcepoint ONE and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.