TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Comodo cWatch vs. ContentProtect

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    cWatch

    Score7.3 out of 10
    N/AComodo Cybersecurity headquartered in Clifton offers cWatch, a website malware and vulnerability scanner that provides content filtering as well at the free service level, and at paid premium subscription levels supplies WAF, DDoS protection, as well as load balancing and website performance protection.N/A

    ContentProtect

    Score3 out of 10
    N/AContentWatch in Salt Lake City, Utah offers ContentProtect, a web content filtering solution.N/A
    Pricing
    cWatchContentProtect
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    cWatchContentProtect
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    User Ratings
    cWatchContentProtect
    Likelihood to Recommend
    7.3
    (5 ratings)
    3.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    2.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    cWatchContentProtect
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Comodo
    Comodo cWatch is well suited for security solution and protection to web servers, websites and web application. It ensures complete security management and early threat detection so that organization can take necessary action on time. It provides real time monitoring to medium size as well as enterprise level organization. Comodo cWatch would not be suitable for Mobile security or small scale business.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ContentWatch
    If you are looking for something relatively inexpensive to lock down specific computers, it would be a useful tool. If the computers themselves aren't too locked down, implementation and management shouldn't be too difficult.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Comodo
    • on demand scanning - you can set up a scan whenever you like.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ContentWatch
    • The client is relatively light weight and doesn't impact other applications.
    • The client isn't easily bypassed, so the user's are kept under restrictions.
    • The configuration is relatively simple and easy to deploy.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Comodo
    • Support is quite late, no swift response from the support team.
    • Ad-blocker works intermittently, sometimes doesn't block the ads.
    • cWatch on Linux is not efficient and needs a major update.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ContentWatch
    • Our primary policy is a restricted list, so that does as advertised. We had one location that had blocks based on categories (adult, illegal, etc). We continually had issues with sites getting completely blocked due to unrelated content. For example, Yahoo had a beer ad on the page, alcohol was blocked, so Yahoo became blocked for the period of time that ad was displayed. We had this happen multiple times and eventually switched to a different solution at that location.
    • I've had issues with their cloud portal not working. I don't have to edit our configuration often, but on numerous occasions, i was unable to get the configuration page to load after login, sometimes for days. The platform just wasn't stable when I needed it to be.
    • We run many of our remote rooms as frozen (after logoff they reset to the image). This works fine most times, but when content protect needs a configuration change pushed down, someone needs to go 'thaw' the computers, download the updated configuration, and re-'freeze' the computer. It would be nice if that information was just dynamic from the cloud and didn't need to be pulled down.
    • The categorization used for policies is very limited and not flexible or easily customizable.
    • I could never get the usage reporting to work.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Comodo
    Support is chat only and was not very easy to deal with. I had to spend hours on chat with them just to get my server connected properly. I was getting cookie cutter answers for a while before they were able to get someone more higher up to me. Didn't seem US based either.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ContentWatch
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    Comodo
    The features and functionalities Comodo cWatch provide compared to other MDR solutions, such as the types of threats it can detect, the level of automation it provides, and the types of incident response and remediation services it offers are much appropriate for our needs. The solution can scale to meet the needs of our organization, and it can be customized to meet our specific requirements. By providing a comprehensive security solution that helps us protect sensitive data and customer information, Comodo cWatch helps our organization maintain a positive reputation and build trust with our customers.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ContentWatch
    At the time ContentProtect was selected, Forcepoint (Websense at the time) didn't have an inexpensive or cloud type product. The same can be said with Cisco, at that time. Recently, we have reevaluated and are going to be transitioning to Forcepoint's mobile client and removing ContentProtect from our environment. The cost is actually now less and we will be able to get both more dynamic control and also give us more detailed reporting on the traffic from clients.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Comodo
    • Application uptime is key. Managing risk of downtime saves much more than the cost of this platform.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ContentWatch
    • It was a relatively inexpensive and simple solution when we needed one relatively quickly, which is a positive. The inexpensive price has kept it in the environment.
    • The lack of reliable reporting has lead to the need for an alternate monitoring solution in a few cases. Network level reporting was used, which is a separate expense, configuration.
    • Time has been lost waiting on the portal and then troubleshooting support tickets when sites that shouldn't have been blocked have been blocked. It has resulted in changes for locations that needed dynamic category filtering as opposed to a finite list.
    • The blocking of sites based on add traffic or sub-sites (rather than just blocking that content like other solutions) has resulted in downtime during classes when those sites were listed in the lesson plan and had previously worked.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots