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

Check Point Web Gateway vs Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 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 Web Gateways (SWG)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), ZTNA as a Service (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
Check Point Web Gateway
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
18th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sangfor Internet Access Gat...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
30th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.2%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point Web Gateway is 1.5%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) is 1.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
iboss3.2%
Check Point Web Gateway1.5%
Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)1.0%
Other94.3%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.
KT
Senior Security Consultant at Orange Cyberdefense
Has improved threat visibility and centralized management but needs wider feature support
We have not worked much with granular control over web usage policies, so I cannot provide detailed feedback. We have not worked with the effectiveness of the multi-layered defense approach in threat prevention. Their product coverage is not as extensive as some competitors. They have fewer products and features compared to competitors. Support for operational technology (OT) is not as comprehensive in Check Point Web Gateway as it is in competing products.
Muhammad Asif Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy GM - IT at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Designed to provide comprehensive and secure internet access with high visibility into users
After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with its own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"The students were always protected, and the content filtering worked very well, seeming to work better than other products we had tried previously."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"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."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"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 pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"Check Point Web Gateway offers a basic bundle that includes numerous solutions, covering about 50% of customer tasks."
"The most valuable features of Check Point Web Gateway are all the IPS. However, what matters for users is content and web filtering."
"We have required technical support quite a few times, and it has been very forthcoming from Check Point."
"Check Point Web Gateway is a reliable and stable solution."
"This product has improved our organization by serving as a connection point with our partners, providing top-notch security and giving us the confidence that we have a secure connection when dealing with our partners."
"The product's best feature is observing how the traffic flows from one gateway to another. It's convenient for checking specific details, and you can manage everything centrally."
"The interface is simply amazing."
"The most valuable feature that I see in the application is the filtering of the URLs."
"The most significant aspect is the control it offers over internet traffic, like managing computer access to specific sites such as Facebook. I find particular value in its ability to control the depth of internal traffic, enabling actions like blocking specific file extensions on social media or specific IPs. This control by categories is a standout feature for us in Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)."
"The solution is interoperable and has centralized management."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"iboss can be improved because the integration could be better; you need to import all the sites that you access today, and there are a few problems whenever you import thousands of websites, making the integration process messy for the users."
"The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices; it is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents, and that is where in 2025 we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"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."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"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."
"Their product coverage is not as extensive as some competitors. They have fewer products and features compared to competitors."
"Most of the time, we are struggling when it comes to getting support."
"Some documents needed to implement with the best practices are difficult to understand, take longer than expected to apply, and sometimes even require support."
"The learning curve is complex for new users."
"Check Point Web Gateway could improve the graphical user interface to make it more appealing."
"Perhaps the latency in the administrative part of the portal would be a point of improvement."
"The support team’s response is not fast."
"There is room for improvement in support because the solution needs multiple regions to reach certain features and validations."
"In Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG), its speed is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with their own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products."
"The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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."
"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 expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"Our customers pay a licensing fee annually or once in three or five years, per their requirements."
"There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. The product is neither too expensive nor too cheap, so it comes at a good price point for my company."
"This program is very, very expensive."
"The product is not cheap. It is expensive."
"It is expensive. Licensing is on a yearly basis. You need to do the support subscription."
"The price is on the higher side, even when compared to Azure Firewall Premium."
"The price is very high."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as a seven out of ten."
"I rate the product pricing a five or six out of ten on a scale of one to ten."
"It is one of the reason for choosing it over other available products. However, recently, this year, there have been recurring concerns. I believe we might consider migrating to another solution."
"The solution’s pricing is cheaper than any other solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Educational Organization
10%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
I think iboss could be improved by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible, and simplifying troubl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
I use iboss as a cloud-based secure web gateway to provide secure internet access, web filtering, and protect remote ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
My experience with iboss's pricing structure, setup cost, and licensing model has been positive, straightforward, and...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point Web Gateway?
It will be the same pricing as other solutions. Fortinet is the cheaper product, while Palo Alto and Check Point Web ...
What needs improvement with Check Point Web Gateway?
As of now, I did not notice any significant areas for improvement. The interface of Check Point Web Gateway is far be...
What is your primary use case for Check Point Web Gateway?
My main use case for Check Point Web Gateway was web filtering and application control. When I want to block social m...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.
Morton Salt, Medical Advocacy and Outreach, BH Telecom, Lightbeam Health Solutions, X by Orange, Cadence, Nihondentsu, Datastream Connexion, Good Sam, Omnyway, FIASA, Pacific Life, Banco del Pacifico, Control Southern, Xero, Centrify, Tradair, Laterlite, Phoenix International, Unisinos, Wilkin Chapman, Connexus Energy, Mutua Universal, Smart & Final, Central New Mexico Community Colleg, Grupo Financiero Multiva
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Web Gateway vs. Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.