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

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) comparison

 

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

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (4th)
Sangfor Internet Access Gat...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
31st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is 2.8%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) is 0.8%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway2.8%
Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)0.8%
Other96.4%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Muhammad Asif Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy GM - IT at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
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

"The most valuable feature is the categorization, where you can allow general access to an application but limit specific features."
"The DLP functionality is very good, including features like OCR."
"This is a highly detailed product with very good key features."
"I have found the simplicity of the solution valuable. The dashboard and reports are good as well."
"Configuration and customized policies are easy to implement."
"Secure Web Gateway's most valuable features are firewall blocking and anti-malware scanning."
"They have well-integrated web security and have the enterprise DLP included in the cloud as well."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category."
"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)."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The solution is interoperable and has centralized management."
 

Cons

"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."
"Ease of use could be improved."
"We have a lot of false positives, which is one area that can be improved."
"They are gearing towards a cloud-based platform for easier management and implementation."
"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 automation lifecycle, integration, and export functionality could all be improved."
"I have been in contact with technical support several times, and I am not happy with them."
"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."
"In Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG), its speed is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Overall, I am not aware of the option to pay for one time use of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway."
"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."
"It is quite expensive."
"The pricing depends upon the number of users."
"The price of this product should be reduced to make it more competitive."
"Forcepoint's pricing is moderate."
"Licensing is flexible. License pricing information is based on the customer, their environment, and on the future approach."
"It is a well-priced option."
"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.
910,350 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise29
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 is not user-friendly. The setup process is complex. You need to install FSM, whi...
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 is no vendor working with this technology. If we have another vendor working wi...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Forcepoint SWG, Websense Web Security, Forcepoint TRITON
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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: August 2026.
910,350 professionals have used our research since 2012.