No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs Fortinet FortiProxy 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)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (8th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
9th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (3rd)
Fortinet FortiProxy
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.4%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is 2.9%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiProxy is 2.3%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
iboss3.4%
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway2.9%
Fortinet FortiProxy2.3%
Other91.4%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.
reviewer1047669 - PeerSpot reviewer
PS & Technical Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Has faced usability challenges while managing integrated components
We are working with web gateway and full endpoint security. URL filter is a notable feature. While it is not specifically related to Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway alone, if you have the complete Forcepoint solution, it can integrate with other Forcepoint products, such as DLP solution and email gateway. The URL filter of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is good for web gateway. Clients and consumers do not prefer it because the interface is not good. When using FSM with DLP, web gateway, and email gateway, upgrades cannot be performed simultaneously since Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway might need an upgrade while email gateway does not, despite having the same manager controlling them. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway works well with banking and small companies. Email gateway is less needed as everything is moving to the cloud.
Emmanuel Dasho - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Engineer | Network/Security at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Ease of configuration and seamless integration enhance operational efficiency
The App Control feature in the Fortinet FortiProx * Deep Packet Inspection (DPI): FortiProxy analyzes traffic at the application layer to detect applications even if they use non-standard ports or are encrypted. * Application Signatures: Uses FortiGuard’s application signature database (constantly updated) to recognize thousands of applications. * Policy Enforcement: You can create policies to Allow, Block, Monitor, or Shape (QoS) based on application type, category, or specific apps.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"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."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"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."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"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 Forcepoint client software can be downloaded on a user's machine so that it can filter the sites from home or the office. That's one of the biggest features. We can use it for filtering our laptops for our users at any place."
"The initial setup is easy. It's not difficult."
"We have found the ease of administration most valuable."
"There is some sandboxing available, which is quite useful."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"I have found the web content filtering and malware filter the most valuable."
"There is less need to investigate if a site is malicious."
"It has got a really good URL categorization database. It is simple to set up. It is also easy to use and quite intuitive. It has got a nice utility for troubleshooting."
"The tool's most valuable feature is traffic inspections."
"The App Control feature in the Fortinet FortiProxy Deep Packet Inspection (DPI): FortiProxy analyzes traffic at the application layer to detect applications even if they use non-standard ports or are encrypted."
"It helps to secure the networks at the DNA level and ensure proper identification and filtering of DNS traffic."
"I liked the tool's ability to provide detailed access control. For example, we could allow users to watch YouTube videos but not post comments. This level of control wasn't available in FortiGate."
"We can use Fortinet FortiProxy configuration for your network."
"The most valuable feature is intrusion prevention (IPS) and antivirus profiles. These features help control user activity, ensuring that they access only permitted websites and protects from downloading viruses."
"The solution's stability is good."
"It is a really stable solution."
 

Cons

"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."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"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."
"There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The deployment is a bit complex and it requires expertise to deploy, which is something that should be improved and made easier to do."
"A room for improvement in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is the support it offers; it's very bad."
"One improvement I'd like to see would be to simplify managing the endpoint for both DLP and web security, so that endpoint management becomes easier."
"To access the root of the product for troubleshooting you must have a data engineer. This is the big issue with Forcepoint. The support community is not good."
"The Sandbox solution should be integrated with the NIST to handle whatever new vulnerabilities or new sites are identified as potential threats."
"There were several issues with the product. Version 8.4 can only be managed with a CLI, they removed the nice GUI interface from version 8.1; the load-balancing needs massive improvements and the incident lists do not sync between appliances, so they need to be manually edited for each one."
"Fortinet FortiProxy should improve by adding more documentation and guides."
"For IT administrators and managers, the reporting features are the main issues that should be addressed in order to improve the performance, security, and effective utilization of the product."
"Fortinet FortiProxy should integrate AI/ML technologies. Its pricing needs to be more flexible."
"Its web filtering capabilities could be improved."
"Integration with existing infrastructure was generally easy, especially if you had tools like LDAP. However, I had to go through a lot of documentation as it was my first time working with a proxy server. We did experience some issues with certain web applications not working properly after implementing Fortinet FortiProxy."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its granular access control. For example, users can browse the main site if you allow access to Amazon, but it stops them from visiting secondary Amazon websites without specific permission. This granular control is really helpful."
"Its power supply process for some of the proxies needs improvement."
"I see that the solution's interface is not in French...It would be good for our company if we could have the tool interface in French."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"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."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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."
"Compared to the other products in the market, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway can be a cost-effective tool."
"Forcepoint's pricing is moderate."
"The solution's pricing is competitive."
"Licensing is flexible. License pricing information is based on the customer, their environment, and on the future approach."
"The solution's price is good."
"It is a well-priced option."
"It is quite expensive."
"Overall, I am not aware of the option to pay for one time use of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway."
"Price-wise, Fortinet FortiProxy is moderate - not the highest among competitors, but not cheap either."
"The tool's pricing is in the middle."
"It can be considered expensive, with a limited lifespan and support that eventually requires updating to newer solutions."
"It offers a more cost-effective solution than alternatives like FortiMail, FortiGate, and various Barracuda devices."
"It is a cost-effective solution."
"The solution is neither too expensive nor very cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
899,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
I would rate pricing for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway a two out of ten. It's really expensive.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is not endpoint security. If we have a chance to change, we would change it because it ...
What is your primary use case for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
We have no big project, but we are trying to sell it in the market here. We are working with Forcepoint because there...
What needs improvement with Fortinet FortiProxy?
For me it may be the wildcards for urls whitelist or blacklist, somehow the page loads. Aside from that there no other..
What advice do you have for others considering Fortinet FortiProxy?
My advice to others who are considering Fortinet FortiProxy is that it is seamless, easy to use, and quite straightfo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiProxy?
Fortinet FortiProxy is much cheaper compared to other products like Cisco, Palo Alto, and others. It is reasonably pr...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Forcepoint SWG, Websense Web Security, Forcepoint TRITON
FortiProxy
 

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.
Adventist Health, Alphawest, Amadori, Anoka County, Compartamos Banco, Davies Turner, EverBank, iGATE, Karlstad Municipality, Lake Michigan Credit Union, Scavolini, Smurfit Kappa, Toyota
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs. Fortinet FortiProxy and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
899,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.