We performed a comparison between Cisco Web Security Appliance and Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The Cisco Web Security Appliance is the preferred choice over the Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway due to its more comprehensive features, including SSL decryption, policy framing, and integration with Active Directory. Users praise the technical support for both products, but the Cisco product is considered more stable and user-friendly. The pricing structure of the Cisco product is also seen as more reasonable, with a one-time licensing fee and subscription-based options available, while the Netskope product is deemed expensive and requires the purchase of physical appliances.
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"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 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 deployment process is very simple."
"Since working with the tool, we have not found any threats in our organization."
"The most valuable feature is that we can use it as a proxy."
"Cisco regularly upgrades features for the customer's security requirements."
"This appliance gives me good visibility in the userbase and their activities."
"It also has high availability."
"What we liked best about it was the ability to apply policy to either a user ID or an IP-based network."
"It integrates well with Cisco Email Security Appliance."
"We can connect cloud apps and monitor them."
"We've found the solution to be quite stable."
"Overall, the product is nice, and I like the URL filtering, CASB, and other security stacks like threat prevention."
"The solution has some useful features, such as microservices. They have sandboxing that allows the prevention, encryption, and remote browser isolation."
"The solution offers good security functionality."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is that everything is on the cloud. It has no on-premise hardware to deal with."
"There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are already relevant to any industry. So grouping the policies is the easiest part and a valuable feature."
"It is for secure web trafficking, and it is doing what it needs to do. It allows customers to consolidate and eliminate multiple technologies onto Netskope and just kind of turn the dial and use more features, such as CASB, VPN. SWG is another feature. You can monitor and govern all the traffic."
"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."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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."
"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"
"Cisco lacks a GUI-based troubleshooting feature compared to products by other vendors."
"The tool needs to provide logs. They need to improve firewall threat defense."
"Customer support is good but could be improved."
"The support for this solution could be improved. We have experienced issues with their SMARTnet support system."
"As Cisco Web Security Appliance is eight years old, though it's simple to access its UI, the UI needs a little bit of updating. If it could be more interactive similar to the latest gen solutions, that would improve the product. Adding a few more integrations would also make Cisco Web Security Appliance better."
"The GUI is not user-friendly, so it needs to improve or be simplified."
"The solution needs to be more user-friendly and easier to navigate."
"The one thing I don't like about Cisco is that they are very much fragmented in terms of providing the complete solution. They keep on breaking their different feature sets into different boxes."
"They should work on marketing material to put out their work with a little more effort."
"Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway needs to integrate IoT, which can help to control devices."
"The initial setup is a bit complex in that it takes a lot of time. In order to get the product to work as you need it to, there is a lot of configuration required."
"Cost competitiveness is its area of improvement. They will have to figure out how can they strategically price it because there are a few players in the game who have been doing it for a long time. They will have to figure out how to go to market on the pricing."
"The accuracy could be improved."
"The solution needs to improve its on-premise detection technique."
"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."
"Improvement in the solution is required in certain areas where the product does not provide access to its direct end users, who use the portal as an administrator."
More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Web Security Appliance is ranked 9th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 29 reviews while Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is ranked 13th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 13 reviews. Cisco Web Security Appliance is rated 7.8, while Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Web Security Appliance writes "Ensures security for remote workers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway writes "Offer capability to create policy groups aligned with specific requirements for users, groups, and locations". Cisco Web Security Appliance is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiProxy, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Symantec Proxy, whereas Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Symantec Proxy, Cisco Umbrella, Fortinet FortiGate SWG, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and FortiSASE . See our Cisco Web Security Appliance vs. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway 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.