We performed a comparison between McAfee Web Protection [EOL] and SonicWall CFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about TitanHQ, Forcepoint, Barracuda Networks and others in Web Content Filtering."The solution is not too expensive. It's affordable."
"McAfee Web Protection was a good tool because in the olden days when you had to use a proxy tool when browsing the internet. Today the logic has changed slightly, in the sense your protection's taken onto the cloud. You'll exit a predefined gateway on the cloud before your internet browsing happens and therefore you're secured."
"The solution does what it's meant to do."
"It has dependable anti-malware and intrusion prevention features all-in-one package."
"The most valuable feature is the ease in the configuration for security roles."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"The most valuable is the blocking of blacklisted sites, a URL that is, either by intelligence or by McAfee, detected as a malicious site."
"It is very stable."
"The initial setup could be simplified, there is a learning curve during the implementation."
"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 could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"The solution should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"There is a real need to make sure all the updates and improvements are in order to keep the security at top performance to continue defeating threats that come daily."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"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."
"Malware, scanning, capture, and integration should be included with the content filtering."
Earn 20 points
McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Web Content Filtering with 16 reviews while SonicWall CFS is ranked 5th in Web Content Filtering. McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2, while SonicWall CFS is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall CFS writes "Reliable content filtering but need more traffic control". McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with , whereas SonicWall CFS is most compared with Barracuda Web Security and Filtering.
See our list of best Web Content Filtering vendors.
We monitor all Web Content Filtering 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.