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

Check Point Web Gateway vs Cisco Web Security Appliance 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)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
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)
Check Point Web Gateway
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cisco Web Security Appliance
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.1%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point Web Gateway is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Web Security Appliance is 2.4%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
iboss2.1%
Cisco Web Security Appliance2.4%
Check Point Web Gateway1.2%
Other94.3%
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
Nagendra Nekkala - PeerSpot reviewer
A user-friendly product that enables organizations to understand user behavior and create policies to block threats from internal and external users
The deployment is very easy. The deployment took one week. We need only one person to deploy and maintain the solution. It's easy to maintain it. The person maintaining the tool must perform data analysis of the blocked sites and the sites monitored by the management. The tool is deployed on the cloud.
Vusa Ndlovu - PeerSpot reviewer
Advanced protection features offer robust security while integration process presents challenges
With the WebAssign integration, it is not easy when I am integrating policies within the company, especially with NAND and wireless policies. The challenge arises when traffic is blocked from either wireless or wired connections. Although implementing it as a standalone is quicker, integrating BYOD with Cisco I and FTB can be tiring. Once it is done correctly, the functionality and reports become valuable, although the implementation part can still be challenging.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"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."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"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."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"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."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"It can also be used as a reverse proxy through the checkpoint."
"The most valuable features of Check Point Web Gateway are all the IPS. However, what matters for users is content and web filtering."
"I think this solution is very helpful to our customers because its cloud-based security can be deployed quickly and maintained easily."
"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 interface is simply amazing."
"It has an excellent threat prevention mechanism."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"It is very stable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the functions of proxy for the users who use the internet and the security it offers against the not-so-secure web pages."
"The deployment process is very simple."
"Since working with the tool, we have not found any threats in our organization."
"The product is stable."
"The features I like most are the DLP functionality for web security and malware protection."
"This solution offers categorization for YouTube and other specific applications from Facebook to WhatsApp, which can be controlled whether it's on mobile or PC."
"The tool has good Umbrella DNS security."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
 

Cons

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"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."
"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."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"For the most modern versions, there currently is no documentation, or it is more difficult to find it."
"Some documents needed to implement with the best practices are difficult to understand, take longer than expected to apply, and sometimes even require support."
"The tool's response time can be improved since sometimes it lags, but not always...The tool's UI should be made more dynamic."
"I would like to be able to see an integration with centralized management services."
"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."
"Deployment issues on Linux have been noted, especially with agents on endpoints."
"The support must be faster."
"We would really benefit from some more visual features that can help view the impact of the security gateway in the organization."
"As Cisco Web Security Appliance is eight years old, though it's simple to access its UI, the UI needs a little bit of updating. If it could be more interactive similar to the latest gen solutions, that would improve the product. Adding a few more integrations would also make Cisco Web Security Appliance better."
"It should have a user-based quota, per-user quota, that can be defined on the appliance."
"The support is good but slow. Generally, the response time for resolving issues is getting slower."
"They need a better graphical interface, and they need a better ISE mechanism."
"The solution could improve the graphical user interface. It is not up to the regular standard of what we would expect from Cisco. Additionally, they need to improve the categorization when blocking in the settings. The CLI could have a better view than the graphical user interface but I did not investigate further."
"The solution is not very compatible with other products."
"There are certain shortcomings related to the product's management capabilities, where improvements are required. The solution needs to provide better management of the category of web pages."
"Cisco lacks a GUI-based troubleshooting feature compared to products by other vendors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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 have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"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."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as a seven out of ten."
"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 product is not cheap. It is expensive."
"Our customers pay a licensing fee annually or once in three or five years, per their requirements."
"The price is on the higher side, even when compared to Azure Firewall Premium."
"It is expensive. Licensing is on a yearly basis. You need to do the support subscription."
"The price is very high."
"This program is very, very expensive."
"Licensing fees are based on the number of users."
"Regarding Cisco price-wise, it is always on a bit on the higher side."
"At the time, licensing fees were paid on an annual basis."
"The solution's cost depends on how many users you purchase. It was maybe $3 or $5 per user, which is a bit expensive."
"When you compare the price of this solution to the price of FortiGate, it's high."
"I rate the product price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"The licensing options begin with 100 users and this is a high threshold for smaller networks."
"There is a subscription-based license needed to use this solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
866,218 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Government
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Healthcare Company
12%
Security Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Non Profit
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
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?
The pricing and discounts for Check Point Web Gateway are similar to Fortinet, making it cost-effective with fair pri...
What needs improvement with Check Point Web Gateway?
Visibility and a high-performance interface could be improved. Furthermore, deployment issues on Linux have been note...
What do you like most about Cisco Web Security Appliance?
The most valuable features of the solution are the functions of proxy for the users who use the internet and the secu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Web Security Appliance?
Comparing with other products, Cisco has more functionality, but pricing is a challenge. Cisco is not a product for s...
What needs improvement with Cisco Web Security Appliance?
With the WebAssign integration, it is not easy when I am integrating policies within the company, especially with NAN...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
Cisco WSA, Cisco Web Security
 

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
New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Caixa Seguradora
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Web Gateway vs. Cisco Web Security Appliance and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
866,218 professionals have used our research since 2012.