We performed a comparison between Barkly [EOL] and Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)."Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"This is stable and scalable."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Very easy to install and use."
"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."
"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."
"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."
"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Detections could be improved."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"It lacks more sophisticated features and opportunity for customization."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."
"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."
"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."
More Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Barkly [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) while Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway is ranked 19th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 4 reviews. Barkly [EOL] is rated 5.0, while Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Barkly [EOL] writes "Has an easy to use interface but lacks features and customization options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway writes "Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues". Barkly [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Talon, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and CrowdStrike Falcon.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.