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

Fortinet FortiProxy vs Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (3rd), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), ZTNA as a Service (11th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (10th)
Fortinet FortiProxy
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sangfor Internet Access Gat...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
22nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.1%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiProxy is 5.7%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Adnan Kallas - PeerSpot reviewer
Superior threat protection with robust IPS and antivirus capabilities
The main use case is to protect internal enterprise users in an enterprise network. Users from different departments such as finance, IT, and sales who want to access the internet, search social media, or visit websites are protected from potential threats when using Fortinet FortiProxy. It allows…
Muhammad Asif Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Designed to provide comprehensive and secure internet access with high visibility into users
After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with its own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"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."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"It seamlessly integrates with various security products, enhancing threat intelligence and improving indicators of compromise."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its granular access control. For example, users can browse the main site if you allow access to Amazon, but it stops them from visiting secondary Amazon websites without specific permission. This granular control is really helpful."
"The most valuable feature is intrusion prevention (IPS) and antivirus profiles. These features help control user activity, ensuring that they access only permitted websites and protects from downloading viruses."
"The tool's most valuable feature is traffic inspections."
"It helps to secure the networks at the DNA level and ensure proper identification and filtering of DNS traffic."
"I liked the tool's ability to provide detailed access control. For example, we could allow users to watch YouTube videos but not post comments. This level of control wasn't available in FortiGate."
"It is a really stable solution."
"We can use Fortinet FortiProxy configuration for your network."
"The most significant aspect is the control it offers over internet traffic, like managing computer access to specific sites such as Facebook. I find particular value in its ability to control the depth of internal traffic, enabling actions like blocking specific file extensions on social media or specific IPs. This control by categories is a standout feature for us in Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The tool has comprehensive reporting capabilities, making it a convincing choice for potential customers."
"The solution is interoperable and has centralized management."
 

Cons

"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its granular access control. For example, users can browse the main site if you allow access to Amazon, but it stops them from visiting secondary Amazon websites without specific permission. This granular control is really helpful."
"Integration with existing infrastructure was generally easy, especially if you had tools like LDAP. However, I had to go through a lot of documentation as it was my first time working with a proxy server. We did experience some issues with certain web applications not working properly after implementing Fortinet FortiProxy."
"Its web filtering capabilities could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiProxy should integrate AI/ML technologies. Its pricing needs to be more flexible."
"I see that the solution's interface is not in French...It would be good for our company if we could have the tool interface in French."
"Fortinet FortiProxy should improve by adding more documentation and guides."
"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."
"The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing."
"In Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG), its speed is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We encountered an issue where the IAG could not connect to IBM QRadar to provide the necessary logs."
"After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with their own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The solution is neither too expensive nor very cheap."
"The tool's pricing is in the middle."
"It is a cost-effective solution."
"It can be considered expensive, with a limited lifespan and support that eventually requires updating to newer solutions."
"It offers a more cost-effective solution than alternatives like FortiMail, FortiGate, and various Barracuda devices."
"Price-wise, Fortinet FortiProxy is moderate - not the highest among competitors, but not cheap either."
"The solution’s pricing is cheaper than any other solution."
"It is one of the reason for choosing it over other available products. However, recently, this year, there have been recurring concerns. I believe we might consider migrating to another solution."
"I rate the product pricing a five or six out of ten on a scale of one to ten."
"The cost varies with models starting from $2,000 a year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
11%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Educational Organization
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about iboss?
Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss.
What needs improvement with iboss?
Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used it for student and faculty filtering on campus.
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiProxy?
The tool's most valuable feature is traffic inspections.
What needs improvement with Fortinet FortiProxy?
One issue is the limitation in using Fortinet FortiProxy for remote users, as it requires users to be members of the ...
What advice do you have for others considering Fortinet FortiProxy?
Before implementing Fortinet FortiProxy, study your enterprise architecture and know your needs. Consider using the h...
What do you like most about Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)?
The solution is interoperable and has centralized management.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)?
The tool is cheap compared to American brands. When compared to Blue Coat, Sangfor offers superior value in terms of ...
What needs improvement with Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)?
The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
FortiProxy
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet FortiProxy vs. Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.