No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Bitsight vs McAfee Web Protection [EOL] comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Bitsight
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
IT Vendor Risk Management (2nd), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (3rd)
McAfee Web Protection [EOL]
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

SA
Senior AIML Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Continuous monitoring has strengthened external security and improved customer trust
There are areas for improvement; we do notice sometimes finding vulnerabilities which gives us visibility to find them quickly. However, there could be a mechanism they can build on top of that for validation as they identify the issues. What will the real risk be for that identifiable issue? Sometimes it could be open because of the traffic; how they detected it could be seen as vulnerable, but upon testing, it might not be a real issue. It could be a false positive because there could be a honeypot that we built. My thinking is about validation, so if they can build that validation part before they expose the risk to the specific asset, that would help. Additionally, based on their reporting, they could also build risk scores and prioritization, which would also aid us. I would suggest adding dashboards and custom reporting, which could help us by enabling rich custom reports with filters. That is especially for leadership because they will not look at each technical area, but overall they would be looking at the risk score and what the assets or critical exposure areas are. Customizable reporting based on requirements would be valuable. I chose 9 out of 10 because the reporting and dashboards would be the first thing I would consider for improvement, and then the second is about the validation part, which could probably improve to 10 out of 10. I cannot think of too much for additional improvements. Maybe some good automation with the API solutions that could be integrated with the CI/CD pipeline or DevOps tools we are running would also be automated and tested.
VivekGupta7 - PeerSpot reviewer
DGM at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well
We used cloud services for testing purposes. We used Amazon cloud services. Depending on the solution, there are a variety of options. There are several options such as Endpoint, WAF, NAC, and SIEM are currently available. A variety of solutions are implemented. It was a third-party implementation by Inspira. McAfee also provides an endpoint solution. McAfee's DLP is also present. Previously, we had used Trend Micro and Symantec. There is a method we had to upgrade our systems, a solution was required, and it had to match the three, four solutions from one company that were going to be cheaper, and there is a bidding process, whoever comes first, based on quality and cost, wins the competition. The requirements were speed, quality, and cost. Because Symantec was about to be renewed, our renewal would be more expensive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Offers open ports from an external point of view."
"The best thing about BitSight is the comprehensive list of risk vectors, covering compromised systems, diligence failures, and behavioral anomalies."
"The product helps us identify the vulnerabilities of internet-facing applications."
"If you are exactly looking for external attack surface monitoring, and you are exploring options, then Bitsight is a very good option that you can explore."
"The security posture trends can be communicated visually, which is fantastic."
"Its customer service team responds quickly."
"BitSight provides information about the external servers, botnet infection and credential leaks, and also offers open ports from an external point of view, so we benefit before any adversary misuses the particular servers that are exposed externally."
"Bitsight gives me a holistic view of my entire security posture, which is something any organization would want to have after getting a tool such as Bitsight."
"McAfee Web Protection is a good solution and its mature security environment has helped our organization."
"It has dependable anti-malware and intrusion prevention features all-in-one package."
"McAfee Web Protection is good technology, absolutely, and it has a very particular configuration that you can implement in a granular way."
"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."
"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."
"Some of the most valuable features are the USB locking on system port blocks, and we are now implementing the policies by pushing the Active Directory policy and group policies on all the systems."
"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."
"Even if the product, as well with the Advanced Threat Defense costs a lot, it's a long-term investment and will help you with attacks."
 

Cons

"The solution’s benchmarking should be improved."
"There has been quite a bit of data discrepancy in BitSight."
"There may be room for improvement in the methodology for identifying findings, as occasional errors occur on the technical side."
"I would rate Bitsight closer to nine, or somewhere between eight and nine, because the reasons I do not rate it a ten relate to opportunities for improvement I mentioned, such as broader risk, cyber risk intelligence, and emphasis on supply chain risk intelligence."
"Since if the number of findings increases for a particular month, your overall risk score decreases, which can become a challenge for a team working on this particular issue."
"There are limitations with Bitsight; I am not saying everything is 100 percent accurate."
"There are areas for improvement; we do notice sometimes finding vulnerabilities which gives us visibility to find them quickly. However, there could be a mechanism they can build on top of that for validation as they identify the issues."
"BitSight could improve the classes and lower-level detections of anomalies that compound the information used to compute the rating."
"The manufacturerers should have more transparancy about exactly what is getting filtered when you use the product and why."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"The solution is stable unless there are dynamic components. If you have remote users then there are a lot of issues in terms of the replication that happens within the hybrid solution."
"The only thing I can think of that might be negative is that sometimes I get a feeling that web protection products are purposely filtering some sites that are not really malicious."
"Lacking filter for spam."
"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."
"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."
"The True Key version for mobile phones should be improved. The password manager is not as seamless as on the desktop. Once implemented, on the desktop, when you go to the site, it automatically fills and connects you, whereas, on the mobile phone, it doesn't do that quite seamlessly. You need to open the True Key application and then select the password you want to use. It then opens in the browser. There are fewer steps in the desktop version as compared to the mobile version."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product has a reasonable price."
"The solution's price is average."
"The pricing is cheaper than some of the other options that are available."
"In McAfee Web Protection you have the ability to install any appliance you want with the same license. If you need an appliance on-premise, you can install it with the same license because the license is for users, not for appliances. If you need one more, you can install it and you don't have problems with the license or need to change your environment."
"The license number would be approximately $35,000."
"It is not very expensive. It costs 100 Canadian Dollars per year per license. I buy one-year or two-year protection. The license covers my PC, laptops, and telephone. The cost is per user but for multiple devices. It has just the standard licensing fees. There are some options for extended protection. For example, if I wanted to have a VPN, there will be an extra cost. So, there are upgradable features, but I'm very happy with what it is giving me with the basic plan. It gives me the basic privacy protection that I need."
"$150 Canadian per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Vendor Risk Management solutions are best for your needs.
911,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
7%
Government
6%
Outsourcing Company
16%
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BitSight?
My experience with Bitsight's pricing, setup cost, and licensing reflects strong enterprise acceptance; I did not opt for only a one-year annuity-based contract but a multi-year one that was based ...
What needs improvement with BitSight?
BitSight is a good tool, but there are a few areas that could be better. Sometimes the asset mapping and findings are not fully accurate, which creates extra work to validate them. It is also not a...
What advice do you have for others considering BitSight?
I think I have mentioned the features comprehensively. I do not think anything else is left unsaid; I talked about continuous monitoring, benchmarking, dashboards, and attack surface visibility, al...
Do you recommend McAfee Web Protection?
I highly recommend McAfee Web Protection. In my opinion, it is a comprehensive web protection platform with a great firewall. I find that it is a lot less bulky than competing solutions on the mark...
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee Web Gateway, McAfee SaaS Web Protection
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cabela's, Belgium Center for Cybersecurity, Fordham University, RBC, Max Life Insurance, Schneider Electric
Sicredi
Find out what your peers are saying about SecurityScorecard, BitSight, OneTrust and others in IT Vendor Risk Management. Updated: August 2026.
911,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.