Forcepoint ONE vs Menlo Secure comparison

Forcepoint and Menlo Security are both solutions in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category. Forcepoint is ranked #24 with an average rating of 7.3, while Menlo Security is ranked #31. Forcepoint holds a 1.7% mindshare in WSG, compared to Menlo Security’s 1.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Forcepoint users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Menlo Security users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

Menlo Secure and Forcepoint ONE are competing products in the cybersecurity market. Forcepoint ONE holds an advantage in feature depth, yet Menlo Secure's pricing and support make it appealing for cost-conscious buyers.

Features: Menlo Secure offers secure web gateways, advanced phishing protection, and comprehensive network security. Forcepoint ONE provides robust cloud security solutions, advanced data protection, and a comprehensive data-centric approach.

Room for Improvement: Menlo Secure could enhance its logging capabilities, SSL decryption, and support for complex sites without bypassing isolation. Forcepoint ONE could improve deployment simplicity, better assist less technical teams, and refine user experience in its interface.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Menlo Secure provides a straightforward deployment process and efficient customer service. Forcepoint ONE offers extensive customization possibilities, but its deployment is more complex and requires detailed support for hands-on assistance.

Pricing and ROI: Menlo Secure is recognized for competitive pricing and high ROI due to lower setup costs. Forcepoint ONE, while having higher initial costs, justifies it with a versatile feature set, making it attractive for those prioritizing features.

To learn more, read our detailed Forcepoint ONE vs. Menlo Secure Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE vs. Menlo Secure

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 839,422 peers since 2012

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

Mindshare comparison

As of March 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 Forcepoint ONE is 1.7%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 1.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford

Head of Cybersecurity at SES Water

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

Read full review

Edwin Eze-Osiago

Regional Solutions Manager Sub Saharan Africa at Infodata Professional Services Limited

Easy to deploy, stable, and scalable

Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement. Currently, the solution is not compatible with Azure AD for third-party authentication. The fraud proxy in the SmartEdge agent is not compatible with Forcepoint DLP or a web hybrid agent. I would like the developers to consolidate multiple agents across systems for better integration.

Read full review

Olivier DALOY

Group Information Systems Security Director - CISO at Faurecia

Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues

The solution should have no impact but it does have a bit of impact on end-users. For example, we encountered some issues in the downloads that took longer than they did without using Menlo. That is clearly not transparent for users. We expected not to have any latency when downloading anything from the internet with Menlo compared to without Menlo. We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution. In other words, we hope to get the same level of protection, while reducing the number of visible bugs, issues, latencies, impacts on performance, et cetera, that we have today with Menlo. We already solved most of them, but we still have too many such instances of issues with Menlo, even though it is protecting us for sure. The weak point of the solution is that it has consumed far too much of my team's time, taking them away from operations and projects and design. It took far too much time to implement it and get rid of all of the live issues that we encountered when our users started using the solution. The good point is that I'm sure it is protecting us and it's probably protecting us more than any other solution, which is something I appreciate a lot as a CISO. But on the other hand, the number of issues reported by the users, and the amount of time that has been necessary for either my team or the infrastructure team to spend diagnosing, troubleshooting, and fixing the issues that we had with the solution was too much. And that doesn't include the need to still use our previous solution, Blue Coat, that we have kept active so that whatever is not compatible or doesn't work with Menlo, can be handled by that other solution. It is far too demanding in terms of effort and workload and even cost, at the end of the day. That is why we decided to transition to another solution. If we had known in the beginning that we would not be able to get rid of Blue Coat, we probably would not have chosen Menlo because we were planning to replace Blue Coat with something that was at least able to do the same and more. We discovered that it was able to do more but it was not able to replace it, which is an issue. It is not only a matter of cost but is also a matter of not being able to reduce the number of partners that you have to deal with. In addition, they could enhance the ability to troubleshoot. Whenever a connection going through Menlo fails for any reason, being able to troubleshoot what the configuration of Menlo should be to allow it through would help, as would knowing what level of additional risk we would be taking with that configuration.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

"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 security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

"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."

"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."

More iboss pros

"The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules."

"The most valuable features of Forcepoint include Zero Trust Network Access and remote user protection for private applications."

"The core CASB solution is the most valuable part. It allows us to put policies in place around which devices can log into our cloud applications. We have a policy that states that only company devices can access these cloud applications."

"The solution is very good when it comes to securing us against data leakage, because of the other proxy. It also has API scanning or data at rest. It inspects data in motion, which is the proxy, and then it has the data at rest, which is the API scanning. We can inspect for anything we want: file fingerprinting, PHI-sensitive data, PCI-sensitive data. It does not matter. We can usually find it and block it in transit and do our remediation with it. It could either be block, encrypt, or allow and watermark the file to follow it and see where it goes. It allows for those different scenarios."

"Forcepoint ONE is okay for me, and I find it a very good solution. Its most valuable feature is monitoring. Its monitoring is very good, and it can communicate with a SIEM system. I also find the DLP feature of Forcepoint ONE good."

"The solution’s AJAX-VM provides constant reverse proxy uptime. It has been very positive for our security operations. When people are trying to access the SaaS solution, it protects us from downloading any of that data and experiencing any type of attacks"

"The pricing is very good and cheaper than other solutions like Netskope and Forcepoint."

"We are able to verify what is getting saved out onto the cloud. It allows us to have some DLP rules, since we have to be HIPAA compliant. If some personal health information has been uploaded to Office 365, then we are able to detect that sort of thing and account for it. We have set up rules to prevent people from doing that."

More Forcepoint ONE pros

"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."

"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."

"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."

"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."

Cons

"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."

"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."

"The dashboards for local use could be better."

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."

"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."

"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."

"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."

More iboss cons

"I need control over access to web WhatsApp, which the solution cannot resolve yet."

"Integration into different multi-factor authentication tools. On their page, they tout Duo, but I don't use Duo. I use another vendor. Not that they don't interact, but it takes a little bit more doing. Any amount of efficiencies here would help."

"Areas for improvement for the platform include addressing scalability and architecture concerns, especially for large deployments involving more than 500 or 1,000 users."

"Their new SASE (secure access service edge) product would have been the one thing I would have requested. Now that they have that platform, I'd like to see it as integrated and seamless as possible with the core product. That's what they're working towards and that's where we're seeing the advancements."

"Initially, we had some challenges that Bitglass resolved quickly. The challenges were around communication. There didn't seem like there was the right level of communication within the Bitglass organization. Once we brought the issues up at a higher level, then they were resolved."

"In our environment, when an Active Directory password changes, we tend to have some latency issues with access. It takes about 15 minutes before that password is accessible through Bitglass after the change. That would be the major thing I see as a negative."

"Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement."

More Forcepoint ONE cons

"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."

"The user monitoring could still be improved."

"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."

"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"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."

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"Typically, the longer you price forward, the better off you're going to be. They have been very willing to work with us on pricing."

"We have our pricing by user. We do our pricing agreements annually. There are also additional costs for maintenance."

"The licensing cost for Forcepoint ONE would depend on the features, but the pricing is very competitive here in Brazil. The solution offers a good price, and I would rate it a three or a four in terms of pricing. I don't have information on whether there are additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees for Forcepoint ONE."

"When considering only the cost, the solution may appear to be costly; however, when evaluated in terms of commercial value, Bitglass is not expensive."

"There is training involved. If you're going to add more people to it, such as cross train more of your group, there's a cost. Other than that, that's it. We have paid exactly what the invoices have said. We signed a three-year contract and not gone above it."

"The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three."

"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."

"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."

"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about iboss?

Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss.

See all answers

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, ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Forcepoint ONE?

The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint ONE?

The pricing is very good and cheaper than other solutions like Netskope and Forcepoint.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Forcepoint ONE?

I have some requirements that the solution cannot currently fulfill. For example, I need control over access to web W...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 17% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 15% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 12% of the time

Cloudflare One vs iboss

Compared 11% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Netskope vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 21% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 15% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 13% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 11% of the time

More Forcepoint ONE Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Menlo Secure

Compared 30% of the time

Talon vs Menlo Secure

Compared 25% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Menlo Secure

Compared 17% of the time

Cisco Web Security Appliance vs Menlo Secure

Compared 15% of the time

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs Menlo Secure

Compared 14% of the time

More Menlo Secure Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

February 2025

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE

March 2025

Download Forcepoint ONE product report

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure

February 2025

Download Menlo Secure product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

Bitglass

Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security

Overview

iboss offers a comprehensive security platform designed for diverse use cases such as web filtering, data loss protection, corporate proxy services, and URL filtering.

iboss integrates advanced features to address dynamic security needs, leveraging its strength in SASE, ZTNA, AI initiatives, and cloud integration, while ensuring seamless operations for remote work. It excels in historical forensics, malware protection, and flexible cloud deployments. Users benefit from comprehensive traffic scanning, robust malware detection, and PaaS capabilities that reduce hardware management. An intuitive admin console ensures efficient management with content filtering and low false positives. SSL decryption enhances security, while DLP protects data in AI conversations. Deployment is rapid and scalable, allowing effortless integration with emerging technologies.

What features does iboss offer?

Granular Web Filtering: Provides precise control over web content access.
Traffic Scanning: Monitors data through multiple ports for security breaches.
Malware Detection: Ensures superior protection against malware threats.
PaaS Capabilities: Eliminates need for hardware management.
SSL Decryption: Enhances data protection by decrypting secure connections.
DLP Capabilities: Safeguards data during AI interactions.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Scalability: Adapts quickly to growing demands and emerging tech integration.
Rapid Deployment: Reduces time to implement security measures.
User-Friendly Admin Console: Facilitates efficient operations management.
Low False Positives: Increases accuracy of threat detection systems.

iboss finds significant application in sectors such as education, where web filtering for K-12 is crucial, and in corporate environments requiring robust proxy services and URL filtering for network security. Its adaptability is essential in scenarios demanding flexible, decentralized security frameworks, particularly for remote work setups.

iboss

Forcepoint ONE is a comprehensive cybersecurity platform that provides organizations with a unified approach to protecting their critical data and assets. It offers a range of solutions that cover everything from network security and cloud security to data protection and insider threat prevention.

With Forcepoint ONE, organizations can gain complete visibility into their security posture, identify potential threats, and take proactive measures to mitigate risks.

One of the key features of Forcepoint ONE is its ability to provide real-time visibility into user behavior across all endpoints, networks, and cloud environments. This allows organizations to quickly identify and respond to potential threats, such as insider threats or malicious activity from external actors. Additionally, Forcepoint ONE offers advanced threat intelligence capabilities that leverage machine learning and AI to detect and respond to emerging threats. Another important aspect of Forcepoint ONE is its data protection capabilities.

The platform offers a range of solutions for protecting sensitive data, including data loss prevention (DLP), encryption, and secure web gateways. These solutions help organizations ensure that their critical data is protected both at rest and in transit, regardless of where it is stored or accessed.

Forcepoint ONE is a powerful cybersecurity platform that offers a comprehensive set of solutions for protecting organizations against a wide range of threats. With its advanced threat intelligence capabilities, real-time visibility into user behavior, and robust data protection features, Forcepoint ONE is an ideal choice for organizations looking to take a proactive approach to cybersecurity.

Forcepoint

Menlo Security Secure Application Access

Menlo Security Secure Application Access makes zero trust access easy, giving users secure connectivity to private applications, including web and legacy applications. At the core of Secure Application Access is the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser, which fetches, secures and delivers the content for users.

In addition to providing simple-to-deploy, clientless ZTA, Secure Application Access and the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser protect applications from attacks such as session hijacking, cookie manipulation, and other tactics that employ protocol manipulation.

Secure Application Access protects applications from Internet threats and provides granular controls for added protection of the application and associated data. These security controls include Read-only/Read-write, Upload/download, Copy/paste, AV scanning, Sandboxing, and Data Loss Prevention.

Last Mile Data Protection

Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection identifies and prevents sensitive data from leaving your company by meticulously inspecting all file uploads and user input across browsing sessions. Leveraging the Secure Cloud Browser, users are protected from the internet and you can protect your organization from data loss with comprehensive traffic monitoring and controls. This approach addresses the growing concerns surrounding data leakage in the age of AI tools like ChatGPT.

By identifying sensitive data through file types, regular expressions, or predefined libraries, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection empowers security teams to regulate data input into AI platforms and prevent unauthorized uploads. This capability provides crucial protection for intellectual property, PII, and other confidential information.

The solution leverages the Menlo Cloud Security Platform's visibility and control over traffic to reliably detect and prevent data leaks originating from both browser submission forms and non-browser traffic. With the ability to inspect encrypted web traffic, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection enforces DLP policies consistently across all users and devices, ensuring comprehensive data protection.

Menlo Security

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.

UNC-Charlotte

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE vs. Menlo Secure

March 2025

Free Report: Forcepoint ONE vs. Menlo Secure

Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint ONE vs. Menlo Secure and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Forcepoint ONE vs. Menlo Secure 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.