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, Forcepoint and others in Internet Security."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."
"The most valuable feature is the ease in the configuration for security roles."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"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."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"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 product is quite an effective firewall."
"SSL inspection is a valuable feature."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The most valuable features of Zscaler Internet Access are it's on the cloud, high network performance, and the interception of users is very easy."
"The protection is most valuable."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"We enjoy all of the proxy capabilities and the capability to integrate into the SIEM/SOC solution."
"Zscaler Internet Access's best feature is the granular policy controls."
"The cloud proxy and integration are some of the key features. Since there is cloud waste, we can quickly provision it and start working on the configuration. On top of that, they have added a few more features. They have integrated CASB, and file sandboxing is part of it."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"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 solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"We need a better customer experience and more flexibility in the product."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"The configuration could be simplified because it is more complex to make the configuration on McAfee. What can be improved is the support of the agent on smartphones, IOS or Android. That still now is not available yet."
"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."
"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."
"Technical support could be better."
"Sometimes it's not easy to use during large deployments of workstations."
"The main issue with Zscaler Internet Access is proxy IP detection, which sometimes makes sites inaccessible."
"When you have appliances, SSL inspection is always a headache due to poor performance and/or lack of ciphers implemented. "
"Zscaler should continue to make the user interface better. They should also improve the backup network and continue to expand it so that it can handle larger numbers of customers."
"If they can also integrate with the multi-factor authentication to prompt users to do another, second-factor authentication, that would be ideal."
"They block Zscaler IPs when the traffic origin is from Zscaler IPs. They've been blocked by certain government organizations so the end users are not able to visit those websites unless we ask them to unblock those IP. This is a bit problematic."
"The solution can be improved by advancing some of the newer technologies such as the DLP feature, and adding email security."
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.