We performed a comparison between Cisco ScanSafe Web Security SaaS and McAfee Web Protection [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, TitanHQ and others in Internet Security."The web security is great."
"It is valuable to be able to block whole categories or groups at one time."
"The cyber security features they offer are most trusted"
"It is functional. It has reduced risk and downtime while also ensuring regulatory compliance, which is critical."
"The most valuable feature is the ease in the configuration for security roles."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"The solution is not too expensive. It's affordable."
"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."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"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."
"Setup is not that difficult, but it really requires proper technical training."
"The licensing could be better."
"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 solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"We need a better customer experience and more flexibility in the product."
"We used a consultant to help us set it up. Unfortunately, he was not that good. They were out of McAfee people. He was a consultant and knew the product, but he was not a McAfee person. How they managed it and how they worked was not straightforward."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"The initial setup could be simplified, there is a learning curve during the implementation."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"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."
Cisco ScanSafe Web Security SaaS is ranked 9th in Internet Security with 3 reviews while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Internet Security with 16 reviews. Cisco ScanSafe Web Security SaaS is rated 7.4, while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco ScanSafe Web Security SaaS writes "Easy to implement with good security and scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". Cisco ScanSafe Web Security SaaS is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, whereas McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Internet Security vendors.
We monitor all Internet Security 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.