We performed a comparison between Cisco Umbrella and FortiSASE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is stable."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"Cisco Umbrella is absolutely stable."
"It analyzes the domain security helps us implement the securest policy."
"The user interface is great. It's very easy to tailor to our client's environment and needs."
"The agent that gets installed on the endpoints or on people's laptops and devices is a Cisco AnyConnect Umbrella module. It's one of the most impressive things because you are able to protect your users anywhere they are."
"The most valuable feature for us is the DNS-based protection."
"Umbrella enables customers to be secure. We are happy with this and this is the most important benefit for customers."
"It is user-friendly. It is easy to manage the solution."
"I haven't found any issues related to latency or any other issue."
"The product can scale."
"The integration with the company's existing security infrastructure enhanced our security posture since it was a straightforward process."
"Deep packet inspection is easier to deploy in the FortiSASE environment. It's much simpler to configure one-touch deployment. It was considerably more convoluted to get that to work using FortiClient. All that processing horsepower is happening in Fortinet's cloud infrastructure, reducing the load on our local routers and on-prem FortiGate firewalls."
"I feel that it is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution is easy to deploy and simple to manage."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"The product can be pretty expensive."
"The price could be better. The price is definitely a bit high, but we have to pay a premium for Cisco products."
"Support for multiple domains is important to us."
"If the security issues are taken care of it would be better."
"It should have a real-time malware classification engine. It should check the malware on the website. It would be good if it had a real-time malware check for the websites because currently, it just compares the DNS queries of the blacklist. It should also have malware control over file execution and the types of files that the users are allowed to download."
"Their support should be improved. It is necessary that the support is efficient. It is not really easy to get a resolution for an issue from Cisco support. They should be faster and more efficient."
"For us, as an MSP, the initial licensing changes were a roadblock, and they still could be a lot clearer. Specifically, it's an honor-based licensing system. We'd like it to be more specific to our traffic or our users so that we can make sure that the customer is paying for all their licensing."
"The reporting could be improved by way of the information that's displayed. For example, when you pull a report, it shows an internal employee going to many websites, but you can spin that right down by saying a lot of it is being cached."
"FortiSASE is a work in progress. One area where there is room for improvement is the ability to use FortiSASE on an endpoint that doesn't have the client on it. Other solutions do that by building a VPN tunnel from their on-prem router into the SASE environment. FortiSASE doesn't have that feature yet, but it is on the roadmap for Q3 of this year. I've seen it in their development environment."
"Security and support are two areas with certain shortcomings in the product where improvements are required."
"They need to have more concise or precise ways to come up with the return on investment for convincing or presenting this to customers."
"The GUI and connectivity, along with the support offered, are some of the areas of concern in the product where improvements are required."
"Some of the solution's back-end connectivity and visibility are not robust and could be improved."
Cisco Umbrella is ranked 2nd in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 108 reviews while FortiSASE is ranked 14th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 5 reviews. Cisco Umbrella is rated 8.8, while FortiSASE is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Umbrella writes "Protects endpoints wherever they are, always pushing people to the right locations to avoid malicious intent". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FortiSASE writes "An easy to deploy and simple to manage solution that can be used for remote worker access". Cisco Umbrella is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Palo Alto Networks DNS Security and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway, whereas FortiSASE is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange and Netskope . See our Cisco Umbrella vs. FortiSASE report.
See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.