We performed a comparison between Cisco Web Security Appliance and Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks and others in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)."On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The solution is stable."
"Cisco Web Security Appliance is user-friendly and easy to manage. It protects your environment while accessing the internet."
"The most valuable feature is that we can use it as a proxy."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the functions of proxy for the users who use the internet and the security it offers against the not-so-secure web pages."
"The solution provides good web reputation and anti-malware protection."
"Great for assisting with connections to networks or apps."
"I would recommend this solution to others."
"The tool has good Umbrella DNS security."
"It also has high availability."
"The setup was fairly straightforward. It's just a proxy."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Setting up Cisco Web Security Appliance is highly complex and it takes about a week. We have to connect it to the Active Directory and configure all the policies for end users. It takes a long time to configure rules for our company data like port forwarding and separating the public and local components."
"The solution needs to be more user-friendly and easier to navigate."
"Sometimes reporting is a little bit short."
"The FTD 21 model's Firepower Threat Defense does not have the multi-instance feature for the virtualization with the physical equipment."
"They need a better graphical interface, and they need a better ISE mechanism."
"WSA is lacking firewall features."
"I would like more automation."
"Cisco lacks a GUI-based troubleshooting feature compared to products by other vendors."
"There's no cloud proxy solution. It's purely on premise, it's a cell inspection, but it doesn't allow any sandboxing. It also doesn't do any tunneling inspection or anything like that."
Earn 20 points
Cisco Web Security Appliance is ranked 9th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 29 reviews while Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Secure Web Gateways (SWG). Cisco Web Security Appliance is rated 7.8, while Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] is rated 3.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Web Security Appliance writes "Ensures security for remote workers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] writes "No support for cloud or large scale". Cisco Web Security Appliance is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiProxy, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway, whereas Trustwave WebMarshal [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.