We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Symantec Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"Stability-wise, it's good. I have never encountered any bugs."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to block users from reaching places that they should not even try to reach has been a boon."
"You can manage and create policies based on a group of users. It can permit some URLs and block others."
"The solution is extremely stable. It has excellent performance."
"Umbrella, being one pane for managing, being all-encompassing, allows us to quickly go in, make a change, and it applies to either every location, if we want it to, or we can have policies in place that only apply to certain users or certain computers."
"There is much differentiation within the licensing so if anyone wants DNS security from the DNS security log, we are there already, and if anyone wants to go to a secure internet gateway, that is also available. We can get the integrated cloud DLP license keys. That is a good benefit with Cisco Umbrella. You can get a complete solution in a single licensing."
"The Global Block List is one of the most valuable features because it's really easy to block domain names as well as URLs. Sometimes you don't want to block the whole site, you just want to block one URL. The Global Block and Allow Lists are the best features for us."
"It is a good cloud-based solution for DNS security."
"The feature that I find to be most valuable is the flexibility of the single endpoint."
"The critical role is web URL filtering."
"Secure Web Gateway's most valuable features are firewall blocking and anti-malware scanning."
"Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway has improved our organization through its ease of use."
"In terms of performance, Forcepoint stands out because it is more scalable than any other solution. It can extend to different types of boxes and integrate well with other platforms and vendors. And it doesn't need to have the same kind of box or throughput to have high availability."
"It’s pretty stable after you get up and running."
"The GUI is quite nice."
"It's stable and reliable."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"It is easy to manage. The graphical user interface is quite easy to navigate, and we don't have any difficulty in using it. It is a good solution."
"Having ready-to-go templates with best practices is definitely something that would be an improvement. Deployment, from day one, is something that definitely needs to be improved for Cisco customers."
"If the security issues are taken care of it would be better."
"It had the ability to do a lot of app control. So, every single app that went through that portal was registered, but there is a general issue with the whole app control. As soon as you add a mobile phone to your network, all of the apps get registered through the system, and you can approve, reject, or just let them go through. When I looked at it, it was impossible to manage app control. There was just so much data. I didn't apply that service because I just didn't have the time to manage it. It would be good if there was a way to categorize applications."
"There are some situations where we would like to block things for specific user groups. I know that Umbrella does that, but it's not that easy.... when you want a specific task for specific rules and policies for user groups, you have to go three levels down in the menu, and it's hard to find where you do that task."
"It should have a real-time malware classification engine. It should check the malware on the website. It would be good if it had a real-time malware check for the websites because currently, it just compares the DNS queries of the blacklist. It should also have malware control over file execution and the types of files that the users are allowed to download."
"It should have more integrations with multiple end user OEMs."
"The pricing is a bit high. Being outside of the USA, we have issues with the exchange rate."
"Its on-prem rollout is quite challenging. It needs better coordination with the Internet Service Provider. It is a cloud-based solution, and any endpoint that connects to it has to go through all the gateway ISPs, but some of the ISPs block HTTPS-based DNS. That's where the challenge occurs with Umbrella."
"An area for improvement would be the classification of websites - it can take a long time for new websites to be classified."
"There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve."
"We are using a V10000 G3 appliance. It is just a proxy. It is just HTTP, FTP, and HTTPS. Now, as our website has developed and we are using rich time-connectivity protocols, the proxy doesn't have the ability to work with these protocols. It would be nice if the UDP feature was there for it to filter UDP traffic. It needs firewall capabilities for UDP filtering. Its upgrades can be quite complex, and they don't always go as per the plan. Its reporting could be a bit more granular."
"The initial setup can be complex."
"But the deployment could be easier. It might take from one day to three days. Usually, that involves an engineer from the vendor and a working team at the enterprise."
"It's the support that's the problem because that's a different question from the product itself — it's the Achilles heel."
"Managing the endpoint for both DLP and web security should be simplified."
"The product could be improved by including a consolidated product that can carry on Forcepoint product email, web, and DLP."
"The reports could be better."
"The major challenge is their support. The support from Broadcom is quite poor. It takes forever for them to get back to you, and when they get back to you, they ask you for so much information, which makes it more difficult. That's the only problem I have with Broadcom. This is one of the reasons why we are switching to another solution. Another reason for switching is that we have a plan to adopt solutions in the cloud so that we can offload the administration efforts to the vendor. In future releases, they can improve its reporting and the process for rules creation. They can also improve Broadcom on things such as security information and event management so that from my same platform, I can carry out functions and probably block websites. Such a feature would be nice. Currently, Broadcom is integrated with McAfee to block access to certain sites automatically. It would be nice if they can expand their integration to IBM Resilient Security Orchestration and Automation Response."
Cisco Umbrella offers flexible, cloud-delivered security according to users’ requirements Cisco Umbrella includes secure web gateway, firewall, and cloud access security broker (CASB) functionality all delivered from a single cloud security service. Cisco Umbrella’s protection is extended to devices, remote users, and distributed locations anywhere. As company employees work from many locations and devices, Cisco Umbrella is the easiest way to effectively protect users everywhere in minutes.
Cisco Umbrella uses machine learning to search for, identify, and even predict malicious domains. By learning from internet activity patterns, this DNS-layer security solution can automatically identify attacker infrastructure being staged for the next threat. These domains are then proactively blocked, protecting networks from potential compromise. Cisco Umbrella analyzes terabytes of data in real time across all markets, geographies, and protocols.
Cisco Umbrella works with leading IT companies to integrate its security enforcement and intelligence. Built with a bidirectional API, Cisco Umbrella makes it easy to extend protection from on-premises security appliances to cloud controlled devices and sites.
Cisco Umbrella is suitable for small businesses without dedicated security professionals, as well as for multinational enterprises with complex environments.
Why use Cisco Umbrella?
Reviews from Real Users
Cisco Umbrella stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Some of the major ones are its DNS-based protection, ability to protect users no matter where they are located, stability, and high performance.
Daniel B., a network specialist at Syswind Kft, writes, “We primarily use the solution as cloud security for our branches. It protects us from direct internet outbreaks. It makes for good flexibility. The solution is very easy to manage. We found the initial setup, for example, to be quite simple. Efficient protection on the DNS level and even higher. The sandboxing feature analyses and handles the complicated security risks.”
Victor M., SOC & Security Services Director at BEST, notes, “It provides security for the remote workers and it helps to improve enterprise security in a very easy way. We mainly enjoy web software protection capabilities. It prevents the end-users from getting into bad sites or sites that potentially could have malware or could be phishing. It helps end-users avoid the wrong sites. The solution works very smoothly. The user interface is good.”
Complete Website Security goes far beyond encryption to deliver protection for websites, data and applications—with 24/7 control that helps to mitigate risk and helps to ensure uninterrupted performance for every website. Multi-layered security and controls make our certificate issuance and authentication processes one of the most rigorous in the industry. Automated management pinpoints certificate and website weaknesses due to unexpected expirations, flawed installations, deprecation and critical vulnerabilities in the event of attacks. Meanwhile, Symantec’s unified security identifies worldwide security vulnerabilities, delivers real-time analytics and helps our customers to protect against damage 24/7. It's why we've become the name people trust.
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 6th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 18 reviews while Symantec Secure Web Gateway is ranked 20th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 2 reviews. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.6, while Symantec Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway writes "Flexible endpoint security, provides URL filtering, and the reporting is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Secure Web Gateway writes "Stable and easy to use and manage, but needs better support and reporting". Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Symantec Proxy, Trend Micro Web Security, Netskope CASB and Cisco Web Security Appliance, whereas Symantec Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Web Security Appliance, iboss, Symantec Proxy and Fortinet FortiGate SWG. See our Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs. Symantec Secure Web Gateway report.
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.