We performed a comparison between McAfee Web Protection [EOL] and Zscaler Internet Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, TitanHQ and others in Internet Security."The solution is not too expensive. It's affordable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"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."
"It has dependable anti-malware and intrusion prevention features all-in-one package."
"The most valuable is the blocking of blacklisted sites, a URL that is, either by intelligence or by McAfee, detected as a malicious site."
"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."
"The product is quite an effective firewall."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"We use ZIA for outbound internet connectivity. The internet traffic of on-prem users will be directed to the ZIA cloud for security checks and web filtering."
"Zscaler Internet Access has helped us reduce the time that we spend managing security policies by about four hours a week. We can use this time to focus on other things, especially the IT team."
"Zscaler excels in security protection and the cloud is always up-to-date. It does not matter if you are a small or big organisation, you will receive the same security quality."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"The solution is scalable and stable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to drop packets."
"The URL filtering has been the most valuable feature."
"The security is excellent."
"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."
"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."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"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 should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"The initial setup could be simplified, there is a learning curve during the implementation."
"Zscaler Internet Access could improve by adding a VPN feature."
"One thing that they could improve is the ability to import rules from other platforms."
"It also needs better integration with other applications as well. There are some restrictions."
"An improvement would be if they could provide an out-of-the-box experience, like 20 to 30 features all ready to go. In comparison, LogRhythm offers out-of-the-box features. With Zscaler Internet Access, there is firewall IPS, multiple security services, filtering, DLP, and CASB browser isolation. These are things that all users are going to be using. However, when an administrator or architect would start building this, I would definitely need to engage professional services to help clients do it."
"Zscaler Internet Access can improve by adding traffic filtering based on the DNS."
"Zscaler does not provide dedicated IPs to each customer. Hence, they share a pool of IPs provided by Zscaler. There is a chance of blacklisting these IPs. I also do not like the multi-management portal."
"In every cloud service in the world, you have multiple upstream internet providers to create diversity so that if one of your providers fails, your network just continues. In South Africa, there is only one upstream provider, and that's not right. That that's a problem."
"I don't know whether it's Zscaler or not, however, sometimes I can't access my time management. I need to wait and try again a few hours later. Typically, if I let some time pass, I can access it again."
McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Internet Security with 16 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Internet Security with 46 reviews. McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and FortiSASE .
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.