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

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) 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 (3rd), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), ZTNA as a Service (11th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (9th)
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (1st)
Sangfor Internet Access Gat...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
22nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.1%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is 4.6%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
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
Shipra Gupta - PeerSpot reviewer
Simple to set up, reliable, and offers great reporting
On the DLP, we are on version 8.9.1, and on the Web Gateway, we are on version 8.5.4. We are using both on-premises and cloud deployments. We are integrators. I am mainly dealing in Forcepoint, including Forcepoint Web Gateway, Forcepoint DLP, and a little bit of Forcepoint Email as well. The presales part of the onboarding process has to be very, very proper. Whatever requirements the users are looking for, that should be put on paper, however. Otherwise, if they're expecting something else and the solution is providing something else, this sometimes creates an issue at a later date. Clients need to know what they are getting into. I’d rate the solution eight out of ten.
Muhammad Asif Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Designed to provide comprehensive and secure internet access with high visibility into users
After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with its own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products.

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 iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"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."
"The spam filter is very effective."
"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."
"Ease of updating the latest hotfixes and patches on the appliance."
"There is some sandboxing available, which is quite useful."
"The policies are category-based, so knowledge of another content URL is not compulsory."
"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."
"For the most part, the solution, when set up correctly, works fine."
"The tool categorizes the user profiles which is very comfortable."
"The most significant aspect is the control it offers over internet traffic, like managing computer access to specific sites such as Facebook. I find particular value in its ability to control the depth of internal traffic, enabling actions like blocking specific file extensions on social media or specific IPs. This control by categories is a standout feature for us in Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)."
"The solution is interoperable and has centralized management."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The tool has comprehensive reporting capabilities, making it a convincing choice for potential customers."
 

Cons

"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"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."
"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."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"I have been in contact with technical support several times, and I am not happy with them."
"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."
"Sometimes attacks or a new ransomware gets through."
"The reporting must be improved."
"I am looking forward to the full integration of the endpoints that they offer for web security and DLP."
"The deployment is a bit complex and it requires expertise to deploy, which is something that should be improved and made easier to do."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The product could improve its automation capabilities, improve integration with virtualization, and enhance its web filtering specifics."
"The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing."
"After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with their own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products."
"In Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG), its speed is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We encountered an issue where the IAG could not connect to IBM QRadar to provide the necessary logs."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is priced a little high compare to similar solutions."
"Expensive, but with a good reseller you can get a very good price."
"The cost for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is lower than that for Zscaler and Netskope. It could be around $4 per user annually."
"The solution's pricing is competitive."
"The price of this solution is reasonable."
"The price of this product should be reduced to make it more competitive."
"The pricing for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is expensive. You pay per user and functionality. I'd rate it a four on a scale of one to ten."
"The licensing is not expensive."
"The cost varies with models starting from $2,000 a year."
"It is one of the reason for choosing it over other available products. However, recently, this year, there have been recurring concerns. I believe we might consider migrating to another solution."
"I rate the product pricing a five or six out of ten on a scale of one to ten."
"The solution’s pricing is cheaper than any other solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
University
11%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

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.
What needs improvement with iboss?
I have a couple of thoughts for improvement, but usually when I address them with my rep, they put it into the featur...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We use it primarily for simpler filtering because we're a K12 entity.
What do you like most about Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
The product's user management is an area where my company does not face any challenges.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
The price for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is normal, rated around five to six out of ten.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway ( /products/forcepoint-secure-web-gateway-reviews ) could be improved by offering a Saa...
What do you like most about Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)?
The solution is interoperable and has centralized management.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)?
The tool is cheap compared to American brands. When compared to Blue Coat, Sangfor offers superior value in terms of ...
What needs improvement with Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)?
The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Forcepoint SWG, Websense Web Security, Forcepoint TRITON
No data available
 

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. Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.