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

Check Point Web Gateway vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway 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)
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (4th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), ZTNA as a Service (12th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (11th)
Check Point Web Gateway
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
11th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Netskope Next Gen Secure We...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
14th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 1.9%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point Web Gateway is 1.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is 2.2%, down from 2.4% 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
Ajinkya Mohod - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers cost-effectiveness and is user-friendly
In terms of the effectiveness of the threat prevention technology in Check Point Web Gateway, the tool helps secure our company's environment, as threat detection and blocking work well. Others can definitely go ahead with the tool, especially if they want to secure their networks and manage firewalls or network traffic. In terms of the benefits offered by the product, I can say that it helps in securing network parameters, environments from network attacks, lateral movements within an environment, blocking of traffic, and managing the traffic. The tool improves our company's cybersecurity posture. I rate the tool a nine out of ten.
Manish Dave - PeerSpot reviewer
Offer capability to create policy groups aligned with specific requirements for users, groups, and locations
There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. If I compare it with other products, the groups and are a little different in Netgroup. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow. So initially, when doing a pilot, at that time, it takes a lot of time to streamline the policies. So that is one thing they can work on. It should be easy to edit and easy to deploy. The only thing is now, as part of the NexGen SWG, in the same IPU currently, the KATB and UBA portion is very limited. So maybe Netskope can extend it in future releases. That is point number one. Point number two, integration with any DLP solution should be very seamless, irrespective of the brand or make of the DLP. Netskope was also to come up with the endpoint DLP, which was expected in Q4 last year but which is still not out. So, that is the reason why we had to go with a separate DLP. If everything were available in one SKU, we would not have to search outside for the business solution. So maybe Netskope can work on all four mediums of DLP, which are the endpoint, the network, email, and the web. All four mediums should be covered as part of the DLP solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."
"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."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"It offers good security and we use it when we want to implement the best security in an organization due to the fact that it gives us broader visibility."
"The most valuable feature that I see in the application is the filtering of the URLs."
"Application control gives IT teams an opportunity to set suitable policies that can be used by all teams when coding."
"I think this solution is very helpful to our customers because its cloud-based security can be deployed quickly and maintained easily."
"The implementation of this tool was straightforward."
"It is very stable."
"You don't have to wander around the tool since it is very simple. You can grab and get a hold of the tool very quickly."
"The solution has some useful features, such as microservices. They have sandboxing that allows the prevention, encryption, and remote browser isolation."
"We've found the solution to be quite stable."
"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."
"The solution offers good security functionality."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its three modules, which are SWG, ZTNA, and CASB."
"Overall, the product is nice, and I like the URL filtering, CASB, and other security stacks like threat prevention."
"Prevents data leakage and protects data."
"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."
 

Cons

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"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."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"There is room for improvement in support because the solution needs multiple regions to reach certain features and validations."
"It is not user-friendly."
"Most of the time, we are struggling when it comes to getting support."
"I would like to see improvement in the tool's availability."
"The support must be faster."
"We understand that if we want to see greater connections, greater services, and a greater capacity established for primary equipment, this solution needs to evolve to make an application installed directly on equipment."
"For the most modern versions, there currently is no documentation, or it is more difficult to find it."
"The learning curve is complex for new users."
"Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway needs to integrate IoT, which can help to control devices."
"They should work on marketing material to put out their work with a little more effort."
"Since they have the Netskope client, adding some functionality in the endpoint would be good."
"There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow."
"The solution needs to improve its on-premise detection technique."
"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."
"The solution could improve the features for Zero Trust Network Access. They should add more security components to that module."
"The accuracy could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as a seven out of ten."
"Our customers pay a licensing fee annually or once in three or five years, per their requirements."
"The product is not cheap. It is expensive."
"The price is very high."
"It is expensive. Licensing is on a yearly basis. You need to do the support subscription."
"This program is very, very expensive."
"There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. The product is neither too expensive nor too cheap, so it comes at a good price point for my company."
"The price is on the higher side, even when compared to Azure Firewall Premium."
"We pay a licensing fee of $10,000 on a yearly basis."
"The price is average. Because the license is user-based, you can increase it as per the user quantity."
"The solution's overall cost is cheaper than regular web security solutions."
"The product is cheap."
"The license model is based on the number of users. You have the possibility to have 10,000 users if you wish."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 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%
Computer Software Company
19%
Government
19%
Healthcare Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
I have the same complaint about them that I have about other software companies. Sometimes when you call in support, ...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We are a PreK-12 public school district, and we use iboss to filter internet content for our students at home and sta...
What do you like most about Check Point Web Gateway?
You don't have to wander around the tool since it is very simple. You can grab and get a hold of the tool very quickly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point Web Gateway?
I don't have a comparison with other products. I know that Check Point is relatively expensive compared to its compet...
What needs improvement with Check Point Web Gateway?
Authentication is only possible through Check Point Identity Awareness technology, limiting some customers' deploymen...
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Netscope, Zscaler if they continue route they are on now. FIrewalls needs great deal of automation on each end, datac...
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Those firewalls that allow extend the perimeter. Nowadays, there is a issue with the static perimeter and all is goin...
What do you like most about Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway?
There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are alread...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
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.
Morton Salt, Medical Advocacy and Outreach, BH Telecom, Lightbeam Health Solutions, X by Orange, Cadence, Nihondentsu, Datastream Connexion, Good Sam, Omnyway, FIASA, Pacific Life, Banco del Pacifico, Control Southern, Xero, Centrify, Tradair, Laterlite, Phoenix International, Unisinos, Wilkin Chapman, Connexus Energy, Mutua Universal, Smart & Final, Central New Mexico Community Colleg, Grupo Financiero Multiva
Arrow, Cloudrise, Sainsbury, Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy, CSA, AVX Corporation Nuna, City of San Diego Case, Genomic Health Case Study, Oak Hill Advisors, MaRS Discovery District.
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Web Gateway vs. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.