We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiProxy and iboss 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."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 most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The solution is stable."
"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 of Fortinet FortiProxy are its simplicity and performance."
"The solution's stability is good."
"It seamlessly integrates with various security products, enhancing threat intelligence and improving indicators of compromise."
"It helps to secure the networks at the DNA level and ensure proper identification and filtering of DNS traffic."
"The tool's most valuable feature is traffic inspections."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"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."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"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"
"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."
"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."
"Its power supply process for some of the proxies needs improvement."
"For IT administrators and managers, the reporting features are the main issues that should be addressed in order to improve the performance, security, and effective utilization of the product."
"Fortinet FortiProxy should improve by adding more documentation and guides."
"Its web filtering capabilities could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiProxy should integrate AI/ML technologies. Its pricing needs to be more flexible."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"Its pricing could be better."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
Fortinet FortiProxy is ranked 14th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 5 reviews while iboss is ranked 22nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 8 reviews. Fortinet FortiProxy is rated 8.2, while iboss is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiProxy writes "Comprehensive security services that require further improvement of web filtering capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of iboss writes "Stable and quick to set up but needs more clear status information for end users". Fortinet FortiProxy is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate SWG, Zscaler Internet Access, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Cisco Web Security Appliance, whereas iboss is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway. See our Fortinet FortiProxy vs. iboss 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.
