Symantec Secure Web Gateway Reviews

Our primary use case is deploying the product as a web security gateway in conjunction with the Symantec client.  

There are definitely considerable problems with this solution. Most notably, compared to Cisco Umbrella it was a lot more difficult to deploy. The deployment process should definitely be significantly simplified.  

The service pack file system should also be improved or even abandoned. The way the packed files are set up could definitely be better and maybe they do not have to be deployed that way at all. There are better solutions which is demonstrated by the fact that other products and companies no longer handle updates this way. They do it in a way that is easier to handle.  

I have been using the Symantec Complete Website Security solution for about six months.  

The stability so far for the solution is very hit-and-miss. It has required a lot of fine-tuning over time.  

Scalability is not really any major issue. It is quite scalable. If we need to do more deployments, we just add them.  

I, personally, have not contacted the Symantec technical support for this product, but my colleagues have. I think the technical process is a bit long-winded and drawn out. The reason for that is that each time there is an issue we have to go through our supplier first and then we get to speak to Symantec. Obviously, in that chain there is a bit of unnecessary delay when we might be better off getting straight through to the source without an intermediate step.  

While we are currently using this tool from Symantec, I prefer Cisco Umbrella which we use with our guest and staff wifi. Cisco Umbrella is very easy to deploy. All the user has to do is point a service to Cisco's DNS service, and the deployment is pretty much complete. You can have it up and running in 10 minutes.  

The deployment process is ongoing as we are still finding problems with it. I would say we are looking at about a couple of months to really complete the process of setup. That is with four people involved in the deployment process. It was entirely too long.  

My advice to anyone considering this Symantec product as a solution is to first do a proof of concept. Do not roll it out completely. Doing the proof of concept makes you sure that you can target all of the different devices and complete the setup for your environment.  

The biggest lesson we have learned from working with this solution so far is that I now think the idea of a service pack file is a bit antiquated and Symantec needs to come away from that mindset. There are existing products that do not use it. That is where we have the biggest issues with the product when we do have issues with it. When we do have those issues, we have experienced complete outages within the whole organization. So I would definitely not recommend it over Cisco Umbrella as we have not experienced any similar issues with Umbrella.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this product as a six-and-a-half. If I have to choose a whole number I would round it down to the lower end — or a six in that case.  

To become better rated — at least nine — they definitely have to start with the idea of changing the service pack file concept and resolving that issue while moving into something more fluid. If they will fix that, the product could be rated at closer to a nine. But that it causes catastrophic issues is unacceptable. If they got rid of the service packs completely and use technology similar to Cisco Umbrella, that would likely resolve those issues.  

It is a web-based proxy - it's a cloud proxy.

Its use case is mostly for customers who need URL filtering, who need a proxy for blocking access to different websites, and ICAP if the proxy supports it.

The functionality is exactly the as same as ProxySG, Symantec's Blue Coat on-prem proxy, but the benefit is that the infrastructure doesn't have to be managed. You don't have to patch it, you don't have to do anything.

In terms of the most valuable features, I like the ICAP capability and URL filtering the most - these are what most people look for when they look at a proxy, whether on the cloud or on-premise. The authentication is also valuable. 

They should have a tool to help with the deployment. It is needed to point all the clients to the proxy.

I don't think either vendor has a deployment tool as such.

Also, Zscaler has something called the Zscaler Internet Access which also acts as a signin box on the next-generation firewall. WSS doesn't do this.

For website security, I worked with it for only a year when I was in Symantec. We supported a few customers who had purchased this product.

In terms of stability, it's fine. We have never had downtime because availability is AWS' responsibility because it is hosted on their servers. So availability is not an issue.

I have never had any issues with scalability or availability because both are using a good back-end infrastructure.

I used to be a part of Symantec so I did work in tech support. Even as a partner, I've been contacting them.

Their technical support is okay. Depending on the severity of the issue, I think they can be a bit slow - a few days for the low severity cases, but for the severe cases normally they contact you back in a couple of hours.

The configuration is pretty straightforward for both vendors. It's plug and play. Because they give you access to the cloud console, as soon as you log in you can get started. If you have all the clients pointing to the cloud proxy then it's just plug and play.

Symantec Complete Website Security works similar to Zscaler, but I think Zscaler is better. For a web-based proxy, I think Zscaler would be my top choice, based on the feedback I have personally received from my customers. The problem with Complete Website Security is with the dot com transition and dealing with Symantec is becoming a problem right now. I think it will be okay in February but for now, I think Zscaler is the best cloud proxy.

On a scale of 1 - 10, I'd rate it a six or seven due to a lack of features compared to its competition.