We compared Netskope and Cisco Umbrella based on our users' reviews across four parameters. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Cisco Umbrella is praised for its customer service, positive ROI, and ease of use, yet it needs to enhance its user interface, reporting and analytics capabilities, integration with third-party platforms, and customer support. Netskope offers comprehensive data protection and advanced threat protection but could improve its interface, customer support, performance during high traffic, and reporting capabilities. Pricing is competitive for both options.
Features: Netskope stands out with comprehensive data protection and advanced analytics, while Cisco Umbrella excels in robust security measures, seamless integration, user-friendly interface, and reliable performance.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost of Netskope is straightforward, with competitive pricing options, ensuring a smooth experience for customers. Cisco Umbrella also offers reasonable and competitive pricing, with a hassle-free setup cost and a simple and flexible licensing process for easy management. Netskope has shown a positive ROI with improved security, data protection, visibility, threat detection, and cost savings. Cisco Umbrella also provides improved security, productivity, ease of use, and integration with existing systems.
Room for Improvement: Netskope could benefit from improvement in its interface, customer support, performance during high traffic, and reporting capabilities. Cisco Umbrella needs to enhance its interface, the solution's reporting and analytics capabilities, third-party integration, and customer support.
Deployment and customer support: Some Netskope users found the initial setup to be simple and quick, as it only involves rolling out an agent and can be deployed on the cloud. Others mentioned that the implementation phase can be complex and time-consuming, requiring coordination and effort. The deployment process was generally considered easy, especially for those with a networking background. Cisco Umbrella users find the initial setup to be straightforward, with deployment taking as little as a day or two. Others report that deployment can take a couple of days to a few weeks, depending on the complexity of the deployment model and any customization needed. Netskope's customer service is responsive, helpful, and attentive, delivering prompt resolution and knowledgeable assistance. Cisco Umbrella also provides highly regarded customer service, with prompt and efficient assistance and a knowledgeable support team.
The summary above is based on 68 interviews we conducted with Netskope and Cisco Umbrella users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"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."
"We've found it to be stable and good for our customers."
"Overall, it is a very good solution. It is a simple solution and very easy to set up."
"The most valuable features for us include tenant lock, content filtering, and DLP solutions, looking for PII and information being exfiltrated."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to block users from reaching places that they should not even try to reach has been a boon."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the Web Filtering and the APT."
"Any time someone went off the network, the AnyConnect client had the Umbrella agent built in, and it would realize when their computer connected that they were not on the corporate network. It would monitor and they would have pretty close to the same rules that they had to follow when they were in the office, regarding what kind of website browsing they could do."
"They have a wealth of articles in their knowledge base. This has given me the freedom to troubleshoot on my own time. "
"Reports provide insight into internet usage and information helpful in creating QoS rules."
"Their technical support is very good."
"It is a very scalable tool."
"It has hundreds of features and many of them are useful."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"The solution offers a better understanding of the real scenario and identifies the cloud apps that are being utilized."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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"
"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."
"They can maybe simplify the configuration. For example, sometimes, the proxy part is quite difficult, and that's why we didn't deploy that."
"I would like to see more integrability with other products."
"The pricing could be improved."
"It would be good to have more extensions to third-party products and a client for other device types."
"The only thing I can think of is that I'd like to see a little more flexibility in policy creation. The way that policy is currently structured is like a "first hit succeeds" kind of policy. It would be nice if it were more hierarchical."
"Cisco Umbrella should introduce an on-premises device."
"User interface could be a little smoother and more intuitive."
"It would be better if there was a little bit of flexibility for organizations that don't have SD One in their environment. Because of the complexity of the environment, it's not easy to actually turn on the feature of the secure internet gateway for our users. We have not been able to explore that option yet."
"I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"Third party integration with other cloud applications could be improved. Sometimes the API won't be working, but Netskope is taking it seriously. They accept all the feature requests, and they are trying to provide whatever we ask from them."
"It should have user behavior analysis and diverse analysis."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"The configuration and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"The initial setup is complex and should be simplified."
"It needed some fine-tuning on core business sites that we used, which were sensitive to what we term a man-in-the-middle certificate by design. Some sites were not tolerant because they presented as potentially malicious. So, we just had to make some tweaks so that it would bypass or interpret it."
Cisco Umbrella is ranked 1st in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 108 reviews while Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews. Cisco Umbrella is rated 8.8, while Netskope is rated 8.4. 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 Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". 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 Azure DNS, whereas Netskope is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Skyhigh Security and Cato SASE Cloud Platform. See our Cisco Umbrella vs. Netskope report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.