We've tried other products and other gateways from Fortinet and Arbor. We chose Cisco Umbrella. The most important thing for us is that we're fully Meraki stack. We have thousands of deployments of Meraki, so it's very easy for us to implement. Our customers are long-time Meraki users, so they're very comfortable with the Cisco stack.

We did not have a previous solution.

In my company, we are partnered with one of the competitors of Cisco Umbrella.

We sell Cisco since we are one of the biggest partners of Cisco in our region, Latin America. Also, I think that Umbrella is a good solution. But Cisco should have considered improving it in the last few years. For example, if you compare Cisco Umbrella against McAfee, Zscaler, or Netskope, three years ago, Umbrella had a lot of the main features for the market drive, SSE, DLP, l7 firewall, and ZTNA. So, now I think Cisco Umbrella has everything to show and be the next leader partner.

The solution that was previously used was acquired by Cisco and turned into Umbrella.

Our company chose Cisco Umbrella because it's a SaaS solution. We're working to incorporate different elements into our network internally. That helps us give prospective clients or customers real-life experiences.

For proxy services, we have been using Zscaler, and for SD-WAN, we have been using Nokia Nuage. For the SD-WAN solution, we made a switch because we had a lot of issues with Nokia Nuage. Don't use Nokia Nuage. It's pretty bad.

For proxy services, we are replacing the Zscaler solution with Umbrella proxy services, but I'm not sure about the reason. It's probably for more security features where using Cisco Umbrella helps us improve our security within. It's much better than the one we have from Zscaler for securing our infrastructure from end to end.

We have just used this solution.

I didn't use any similar solution previously. 

I used a similar SaaS solution by Palo Alto, but Cisco Umbrella seems to be quite unique because it's a DNS layer. I'm not sure if any other company is doing the same thing. We integrate Cisco Secure Endpoint and Cisco Umbrella to provide end-user detection and prevention. It does what it's supposed to do with most of a lot of admin work. It's a gateway.

Instead of Cisco Umbrella, we used Zscaler for web filtering, but we've always had Cisco firewalls.

When we switched in 2020, Zscaler didn't seem to be developing their product as well. It didn't match our requirements anymore.

Previously, we were using an antivirus company for antiviral protection. The problem with antivirus is that it's reactive. It does not proactively avoid infection. Cisco Umbrella is proactive because it blocks sites before we may get an infection. We don't react to infections; we proactively avoid infections. Although there are solutions now that do the same, Cisco Umbrella was the first to market.

We sold a different solution previously, which provided a much simpler DNS protection. It did not have the power and is not really comparable to Umbrella. It was more of a consumer-level product that did not have much of an impact. I had it installed on my internet access at home, and it never intercepted anything I did. It's only once I installed Umbrella that I saw differences in the ways my DNS calls were intercepted. The main reason why we offer Umbrella is its business-grade security.

Umbrella was actually the first [solution we used in this area]. Once we discovered that that was a big hole we had—we didn't have anything that was controlling content for our internal end-users—we could run into problems with regulation, problems with compliance. It could run into issues with HR, as well as security issues associated with malware. We knew it was a hole, that we were missing. Umbrella filled that hole for us.

I did not previously use another solution to this extent. 

The previous solution was a proxy solution. I'd not state the name of the solution, but it was a proxy solution. It was heavy. It was slow, and there was no easy way for tracking old things. And of course, you can't protect your users outside of the company environment.

We didn't use any other solution previously. It's the first time we are using such a solution.

We did not have a previous solution.

We previously used proxy servers, but I wanted a more modern interface, and that's why I chose Umbrella.

We didn't have a whole lot going on in terms of security and when I got a new manager, he asked, "How do we protect the people when they're out in a store?" That's when we saw that's where the flaw was. We were protecting everything on-prem but the gap we found was that when users were traveling around, we were not seeing where they were going. We were holding them to a standard internally, but when they were outside they were doing whatever they wanted.

We're a Cisco shop. We have a lot of their products.

We were using another solution for DNS security. It was not as complete and  would only allow us to manage security inside our network. We weren't able to get to the endpoints when staff were not working on-premises. We did a proof of concept with Cisco Umbrella and two other solutions for three months and chose to go with Cisco Umbrella because it gave us the features that were more suited to our organization.

Previously, our users were only in-house and we had internal firewalls that were doing a lot of this work. But now that they're hybrid, we had to come up with a new solution.

I used Sophos, FortiGate, and Palo Alto firewalls.

Cisco Umbrella is manageable and well-supported by various vendors and partners, including Cisco Direct. It offers diverse technologies and features. However, now Sophos and FortiGate offer better tools and firewalls than Cisco.

Forti excels in SD-WAN services and integrates various functionalities like FortiManager, FortiAnalyzer, and Wi-Fi controller within a single device.

I've not used a similar solution. We went for Cisco Umbrella because they are delivering good products. We also have all Cisco switches in place, and then we have Cisco ACI and DNA Center. We only don't have Cisco firewalls.

I am not aware of any tools that we could consolidate or get rid of by using Cisco Umbrella because it was installed about five or six years before I came here.

We did not previously use another DNS solution. This solution was our first.

We used other products such as separate virus scanners. Using all the products from Cisco simplified things. You don't need to worry about whether it's compatible or whether you need to do something special on the antivirus side. It simplified things for me.

We did not previously use a different solution. We were blocking things through the Cisco firewall. 

Migrating from our previous firewall configuration to Cisco Umbrella was not so difficult. We did not additionally configure the normal firewall policies. All we did with this solution was add an additional layer of security.

We have actually been using Umbrella since it came out. Previously, we just ran our own DNS. From a security product perspective, Umbrella has been the only DNS solution that we've used.

We did not have a previous solution. We used to use CWS, which was Umbrella before it was named Umbrella.

When our clients switch to Umbrella, it's either because I suggest it to them or they know about the product and they ask to have it brought into their organizations.

We sell both Cisco and Zscaler. If the client already has a Cisco solution, then Umbrella is usually a better fit. In cases when a customer already uses Zscaler, has another SD-WAN solution, or has a different vendor, Zscaler may be the first choice.

As a Cisco Secure reseller, we bring value to our customers through our technicians and engineers who consult with them and implement the solution. This is a benefit from our partner side.

We had a different overall firewall solution, which was a Sophos firewall. But since we migrated away from that, we implemented the Firepower firewall and, in addition to that, added in Umbrella.

The reliability wasn't really there, with Sophos always having issues, even from the endpoint perspective. We had issues across the board and it was management's decision to look into a new solution.

We did previously use a different solution. 

We wanted to do the local breakout, but our previous solution wasn't able to do it. We spent quite a bit of time testing the other solution, but it just didn't work. This is why we reached out to Cisco.

The previous solution we used was Akamai, but Akamai was more costly compared to Umbrella, and the consumption model was not favorable. Cisco Umbrella cost at least 30 percent less compared to what Akamai offered.

We implemented this solution because we had a gap in the visibility of our DNS protection, and this was able to remedy that.

We had a French solution. It was an old solution, and it was not sufficient for the company. Cisco Umbrella has been the best for our company.

In the past I worked with Checkpoint Harmony, which is a similar tool that provides a certain level of endpoint support to users and a measure of coverage.

I like the responsiveness of the technical assistance center of Cisco Talks. As such, I will always go with Cisco. It was thanks to the technical assistance center that I went with Checkpoint Harmony on one occasion.

For web filtration, we tried Websense before but now I believe the cloud solution is the way to go, it's much better. We had a customer and they needed to have different layers of protection, especially today with cybersecurity, and open DNS is one of them. I believe it's mandatory that you must have some sort of defense because it's is up in the air, there may be other solutions, but something needs to protect you from going to the wrong websites.

Our current solution isn't working very well and keeps breaking.

Prior to Cisco Umbrella, we were using on-premises solutions. The capability is good except that a cloud-based solution can be more easily provided to all of our end-users. 

Previously, it was the Wild West at our locations that are not on our MPLS network. They were looking at whatever they wanted as they were only on a personal wireless device. We upgraded them to a Cisco 819 or a Cradlepoint but didn’t have much in the way of filtering or DNS with their GUI.

We have worked with Forcepoint and vScaler.

I would recommend vScaler. On the Cloud front, the product is quite stable, and it is easy to manage.

vScaler and Cisco Umbrella are comparable.

The smaller sites typically use non-enterprise grade equipment, and we switched because it is easier to manage the solution, especially when it's set up to our standards.

No

Before Cisco Umbrella, we were using the Infoblox solution. It was not an easy or flexible solution. Infoblox is an on-premises solution that requires a VPN, or all of the users need to connect to a VPN, just to get the DNS resolutions. This was not easy, and it was not easy to implement.

We’ve used and deployed ZScaler, Websense, and other UTM-based blocking solutions. This product is not always the best if you need complex policy and scheduling, and other user soft-pass through authentication.

We had issues with our traditional secure web gateway. Our environment is not entirely SD One supported yet. We had problems with the SWG device for dot com users. We got advice from Cisco that Cisco data can do the same functionality for that. So, we'll be using it.

We were using Broadcom as our secure web, but we had issues with the number of connections that it could handle. That's the setback, and that's why we're opting for the Cisco umbrella solution.

We have a partnership with a company here, and we have a partnership with Cisco. Most of our appliances in the environment are Cisco products, and we felt that going for a product from them would serve our data. We didn't look at other products.

We switched because we just wanted to be in the Cisco ecosystem, not specifically because other products from other companies were not good enough.

Before Cisco Umbrella, there wasn't any security product.

There is a product called Infoblox, but I haven't used it.

Umbrella is the first product of its type that I've used. Otherwise, my company has relied upon anti-virus products to protect hosts.

Yes, we used Bluecoat ASG to block known Malwares.

usually, to complete Sandboxing solution (which used for unknown malwares), we used other solutions like Cisco Umbrella or Bluecoat ASG to block the known malwares on Web GW.

I've dealt with other products on a different scale. I'd say that Cisco Umbrella is far and away much better than the other cloud security products on the market.

Previous infrastructure relied on router/gateway-installed software for filtering and security. It simply isn't enough for a modern network, especially not one as complicated and security-conscious as education.

In addition to Cisco Umbrella, we are using Cisco Firepower. 

We use the entire Cisco solution that includes Cisco Umbrella, Cisco AMP for Endpoint, and Cisco Firepower.

This was the first product we used for filtering websites.

One of our clients did use a different solution. We ended up replacing it with Cisco Umbrella.

This was the first solution that we implemented for our client.

Previously, in another organization, we used OpenDNS. That product was purchased by Cisco to be used as their product under the name of Umbrella. So I did not switch the product really, but the name and my company have changed.   

We did not switch solutions. We just added an extra layer of defense.

iPrism was inline, did not scale, and not easy to manage.

We have used Websense, Barracuda and iPrism in the past. The flexibility of OpenDNS supporting a high-performance cloud infrastructure and not requiring any hardware or software cost was a major factor. The monthly pricing model fits into our company’s core services as a Managed Services provider and eliminates the need for annual renewal licenses.

Actually, we recently switched over to Zscaler because it has more features and it's more scalable than Cisco Umbrella.

This is the first time we used one of these products, one of the known DNS firewalls.