We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Cisco Secure Email vs. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Proofpoint, Fortinet and others in Email Security. Updated: November 2021.
553,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
"The filtering is definitely better at catching both spam and malicious messages, and there's a lot of extremely granular ability for setting up rules. You can do it the way you want to. The Microsoft solution tends to be pretty limited in how it allows some of that to be done.""The added value of it is that every migration to a new version is initiated by the Cisco version itself, so that is a bunch of work that you don't have to do on the Cisco ESA system on-premise. As it becomes a safe platform, you don't need to invest anything in your own data center or in your upgrade path.""The most valuable features are Advanced Malware Protection, URL filtering, and of course Reputation Filtering.""Anti-Spam and Advanced Malware Protection are the most valuable features... and we also have the option to block Zero-day attacks.""The solution is very configurable. It has enabled us to configure some specific filters to stop emails that general configurations didn't stop. It's a powerful solution. It can analyze a lot of emails simultaneously, with no problems of capacity or system load.""There is a huge return compared to if we didn't have a gateway appliance, as far as blocking malicious emails.""It has the ability to tell us, after an email has been delivered, where else it went, once it got inside. Maybe it's something we wanted it to stop and it didn't stop it, but it notified us later that it was something that it should have stopped. It can give us a trajectory of all the other places that it went internally and it can tell us what files were transferred as well.""It is doing its work. It is doing what it was actually designed to do. It has ensured we don't have business email compromises, and it has also ensured that our brand Galaxy is unique all year round."

More Cisco Secure Email Pros »

"For the most part, the solution, when set up correctly, works fine.""One of the main features I have found the solution to be efficient.""The spam filter is very effective.""Once deployed, the management console is simple and easy to use.""The antiviral sandboxing.""Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway has improved our organization through its ease of use.""In terms of performance, Forcepoint stands out because it is more scalable than any other solution. It can extend to different types of boxes and integrate well with other platforms and vendors. And it doesn't need to have the same kind of box or throughput to have high availability.""The feature that I find to be most valuable is the flexibility of the single endpoint."

More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pros »

Cons
"We have been struggling in the last month with Cisco encryption and with the S/MIME encryption. I don't know if it is an issue on our side or if these features of the solution are not working very well.""The area of license renewal should be improved. We normally renew our license every year. There is a feature called smart licensing, and I switched from the legacy mode to the smart licensing mode because of what I thought smart licensing does. I thought it would make licensing renewal seamless and very swift, but ever since I've switched to smart licensing, each time I want to renew my license, it is a whole lot of headache. The process is not smooth, and I had to keep calling Cisco TAC to see how the issue can be resolved. At one point, I wanted to revert back to the legacy mode, but I can't revert. Once you switch from the legacy mode to the smart licensing mode, you can't revert. They should improve on the visibility of the smart licensing mode so that it can indeed be smart and easier to use for the license renewal every year. That is one challenge.""They can do it better with web links, with the URLs. They have a technology called Outbreak but it doesn't work as well as we would like.""I would like more functionality and how to use it for Level 2 type staff. The biggest issue is it needs to be easier to use and navigate.""I use the search all the time. Sometimes, it is hard to search for things and things are hard to find. People come to me all the time, saying, "This email didn't get through." Then, I go searching and don't find it on the first search. You have to think about alternative searches. I don't know if there is an easier way that they could help to find things. I don't know how they could simplify it, because now everybody else is using the cloud and everything is coming from Office 365, or whatever. It is just not the same environment from years ago where everybody had their own server and you could search easier.""The interface is dated. It has looked pretty much the same for 15 years or so. It would be helpful to be able to do everything from one spot. The centralized quarantine and reporting are completely separate from policy administration.""The UI is definitely one area of improvement because it doesn't match other interfaces and the navigation can be a little clunky.""Typically, in a phishing email, they try to use a name everybody's going to recognize, like the CEO's name or the CFO's name... With this appliance, the way it's designed at the moment, for us to really stop that with any level of confidence, we have to build a dictionary of all the names of the people we want it to check, and all the ways they could be spelled. My name would be in there as Phillip Collins, Phillip D. Collins, Phillip Dean Collins, Phil Collins, Phil D. Collins. There could be eight or 10 variations of my name that we'd have to put in the dictionary. There's no artificial intelligence to say "Phil Collins" could be all these other things, and to stop phishing from coming through in that way."

More Cisco Secure Email Cons »

"In the on-premises version, I don't like the deployment and structuring of the device.""Stability needs some improvement, we have on occasion experienced some delay when it is synchronized.""The solution should be better able to support itself and operate faster. Sometimes the technical support team takes too long to respond.""We are using a V10000 G3 appliance. It is just a proxy. It is just HTTP, FTP, and HTTPS. Now, as our website has developed and we are using rich time-connectivity protocols, the proxy doesn't have the ability to work with these protocols. It would be nice if the UDP feature was there for it to filter UDP traffic. It needs firewall capabilities for UDP filtering. Its upgrades can be quite complex, and they don't always go as per the plan. Its reporting could be a bit more granular.""I have been in contact with technical support several times, and I am not happy with them.""A feature we wish to see addressed in the next release of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway involves its administration.""There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve.""Overall the software is occupying too much memory space. If they could remedy that, it would be a better experience, because today Windows is occupying too much memory space as well (in terms of the RAM), and this software has also started occupying all the memory. Due to this, I have less space for my other office products and data. I can't, for example, operate a huge Excel sheet or other datasets."

More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"There are additional fees for adding features.""At times, we feel the pricing is a bit too high, but then, there is also room for discounts. We enjoy a lot of discounts, and that is why we are still with them. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.""You're going to get what you pay for. If you're not willing to pay the price of Cisco, you're not going to get a product that's as good as Cisco. I don't think Cisco is overpriced, because for the last two years I've been comparing it to Microsoft and Cisco has been cheaper and given us more features.""The licensing was all transferred.""In my previous organization, avoiding four instances of CryptoLocker within an estimated six month period is approximately $600,000 in lost time and effort. Our five year cost was about a million dollars, and the four outages that we had equated to 65 percent of that five year cost.""Cisco Secure Email and the support are priced well. It's not cheap, but there are other solutions that offer less and cost so much. For example, Microsoft is more expensive than Cisco.""Compared to Cisco's on-prem service, the cost is the same, but you don't have to pay for the hardware and you don't have to maintain the system, as far as upgrades and hardware failures are concerned. It is cheaper to operate on their cloud service than it is to operate with their on-prem service."

More Cisco Secure Email Pricing and Cost Advice »

"The price of this solution is reasonable.""Overall, I am not aware of the option to pay for one time use of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway.""The licensing is not expensive.""Licensing is flexible. License pricing information is based on the customer, their environment, and on the future approach.""The price of this product should be reduced to make it more competitive.""The solution is priced a little high compare to similar solutions."

More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Email Security solutions are best for your needs.
553,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The added value of it is that every migration to a new version is initiated by the Cisco version itself, so that is a bunch of work that you don't have to do on the Cisco ESA system on-premise. As it… more »
Top Answer: We have Microsoft and we have the E5 licenses, they have more EDR responses on certain emails. That's something that Cisco ESA on the cloud doesn't have. They don't do anything about MITRE attacks… more »
Top Answer: In terms of performance, Forcepoint stands out because it is more scalable than any other solution. It can extend to different types of boxes and integrate well with other platforms and vendors. And… more »
Top Answer: There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve.
Ranking
1st
out of 56 in Email Security
Views
11,984
Comparisons
7,619
Reviews
11
Average Words per Review
1,574
Rating
8.9
Views
7,181
Comparisons
4,542
Reviews
11
Average Words per Review
609
Rating
7.9
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco Email Security, IronPort, Cisco Email Security, ESA, Email Security Appliances
Forcepoint SWG, Websense Web Security, Forcepoint TRITON
Learn More
Overview

Customers of all sizes face the same daunting challenge: email is simultaneously the most important business communication tool and the leading attack vector for security breaches. Cisco Email Security enables users to communicate securely and helps organizations combat Business Email Compromise (BEC), ransomware, advanced malware, phishing, spam, and data loss with a multilayered approach to security.

Websense Web Security blocks web threats to reduce malware infections, decrease help desk incidents and free up valuable IT resources. It has more than 100 security and filtering categories, hundreds of web application and protocol controls, and 60-plus reports with customization and role-based access.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Email
Learn more about Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway
Sample Customers
SUNY Old Westbury, CoxHealth, City of Fullerton, Indra
Adventist Health, Alphawest, Amadori, Anoka County, Compartamos Banco, Davies Turner, EverBank, iGATE, Karlstad Municipality, Lake Michigan Credit Union, Scavolini, Smurfit Kappa, Toyota
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Energy/Utilities Company19%
Retailer14%
Manufacturing Company10%
Financial Services Firm10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider27%
Computer Software Company23%
Government6%
Financial Services Firm5%
REVIEWERS
Computer Software Company17%
Financial Services Firm11%
Healthcare Company11%
Government11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider25%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business34%
Midsize Enterprise24%
Large Enterprise41%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business8%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise71%
REVIEWERS
Small Business30%
Midsize Enterprise17%
Large Enterprise53%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Proofpoint, Fortinet and others in Email Security. Updated: November 2021.
553,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Cisco Secure Email is ranked 1st in Email Security with 11 reviews while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 3rd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 14 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 9.0, while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Email writes "Stops the vast majority of email from getting in, across our multiple email domains". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway writes "Flexible endpoint security, provides URL filtering, and the reporting is good". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with FireEye Email Security, Fortinet FortiMail, Proofpoint Email Protection, Cisco Secure Email Cloud Mailbox and Check Point Anti-Spam and Email Security Software Blade, whereas Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiProxy, McAfee Web Protection and Cisco Web Security Appliance.

We monitor all Email Security 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.