We performed a comparison between Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management and McAfee Web Protection [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, BitSight, AuditBoard and others in IT Vendor Risk Management."Offers open ports from an external point of view."
"The product helps us identify the vulnerabilities of internet-facing applications."
"I prefer BitSight due to its patch management capabilities. The score is a valuable feature. I have contacted the customer support through e-mail and their response rate is fast. I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Its customer service team responds quickly."
"McAfee Web Protection was a good tool because in the olden days when you had to use a proxy tool when browsing the internet. Today the logic has changed slightly, in the sense your protection's taken onto the cloud. You'll exit a predefined gateway on the cloud before your internet browsing happens and therefore you're secured."
"It's a solution that permits making a granular configuration and it is easier to deploy the same configuration on a lot of devices using the central console. It is the master of the product."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"The solution does what it's meant to do."
"It doesn't seem to take too much system bandwidth, and I also like its reporting. Once a month, it gives me a reminder of the activity. It reminds me that the protection is on, and if there are any issues, it summarizes those minor issues. During the month, it only notifies when there is something special."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"The most valuable is the blocking of blacklisted sites, a URL that is, either by intelligence or by McAfee, detected as a malicious site."
"The solution is not too expensive. It's affordable."
"There may be room for improvement in the methodology for identifying findings, as occasional errors occur on the technical side."
"At the moment, when the vulnerability score decreases, it remains the same for quite a while, even though issues are resolved in 24 hours."
"Data enrichment is the major issue."
"Its factor analysis feature could be better."
"The solution’s benchmarking should be improved."
"The solution should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"The configuration could be simplified because it is more complex to make the configuration on McAfee. What can be improved is the support of the agent on smartphones, IOS or Android. That still now is not available yet."
"The manufacturerers should have more transparancy about exactly what is getting filtered when you use the product and why."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"I'm not sure if the solution itself is cloud-based or not. If it isn't they really need to begin to develop that out a bit."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"There is a real need to make sure all the updates and improvements are in order to keep the security at top performance to continue defeating threats that come daily."
More Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is ranked 2nd in IT Vendor Risk Management with 5 reviews while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in IT Vendor Risk Management with 16 reviews. Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is rated 8.6, while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management writes "User-friendly solution with robust patch management capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is most compared with SecurityScorecard, RiskRecon, Microsoft Secure Score, UpGuard Vendor Risk and Tenable Lumin, whereas McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with .
We monitor all IT Vendor Risk Management 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.