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

Cisco ScanSafe Web Security SaaS [EOL] vs McAfee Web Protection [EOL] comparison

 

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

Cisco ScanSafe Web Security...
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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

Samir Shah - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO / Managing Director at Infinity Access Technologies Pvt Ltd
Easy to implement with good security and scanning
The software is scalable, no doubt about that. As such, the customers that we have given this software to had previously scaled up. Still, with a new version, we were able to satisfy them without any issue. Cisco is continuously working on making the software better, stronger, and compliant with the latest vulnerabilities. Their main aspect is to have software or hardware that is scalable. There is never an issue with the scalability. I'd rate it five out of five in terms of the ability to scale. This is a data center, so there are a lot of services that are being accessed from different departments. As far as users are concerned, they don't have more users within the data center. However, when it comes to accessing various services from the data center, it is sizeable. There may be 4,000 service requests happening daily. There may not be more than 50 users in general.
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

"It is valuable to be able to block whole categories or groups at one time."
"The web security is great."
"The cyber security features they offer are most trusted"
"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 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 features of McAfee Web Protection are the reporter, and you have the option to have an agent installed in the notebooks or on the mobiles. You are able to have the same policies inside and outside of your organization which is a benefit."
"The product is quite an effective firewall."
"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 most valuable feature is the ease in the configuration for security roles."
"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."
"It has dependable anti-malware and intrusion prevention features all-in-one package."
 

Cons

"The licensing could be better."
"Setup is not that difficult, but it really requires proper technical training."
"The solution is not supported well because it is legacy."
"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 manufacturerers should have more transparancy about exactly what is getting filtered when you use the product and why."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"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."
"The solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The license number would be approximately $35,000."
"$150 Canadian per year."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is cheaper than some of the other options that are available."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Internet Security solutions are best for your needs.
879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

ScanSafe Web Security SaaS
McAfee Web Gateway, McAfee SaaS Web Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Arup Group, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, K&L Gates, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Transplace
Sicredi
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, iboss and others in Internet Security. Updated: December 2025.
879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.