Cisco Umbrella Reviews

My company's biggest use case for Cisco Umbrella is for DNS security protection for five years. A year and a half ago, we were able to upgrade and upsell a project to Umbrella's SIG. So, now we're working on a new upgrade to new packages, including Citrix ZTNA.

In my opinion, DNS protection is basic for most customers. But the simplest way to protect web traffic is with its functionality, like SWG. 

L7 and the firewall in the cloud are good features. We always hear good feedback from our customers.

I'm hoping for the conversion of Cisco ZTNA's features from Duo to Umbrella. This feature was announced at Cisco Live. I think Cisco is now on the right way to being the most competitive against some vendors like Netskope and Zscaler. 

I have been using Cisco Umbrella since somewhere between 2014 and 2015.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. I only saw an impact once on its stability, and that was when I was working five years ago in the support in Johnson & Johnson environment, and Johnson uses SIP security for everything. So, one of the things was that in the bank that uses it, it was miscategorized in Cisco Umbrella. After I did investigations, I found that the problem was not in Cisco Umbrella. The problem was with the bank because they needed to split the data centers in Umbrella, and Umbrella could not recognize the object.

Compared to the past, in my opinion, Cisco's support is better nowadays. The policies have decreased a little, in my opinion, but it still offers the best support in IT. This is common feedback from customers, including the ones that complain about Cisco's partners, but at the same time, they say its support is better than all different competitors. I rate the support an eight out of ten.

Positive

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.

I wasn't involved in the solution's setup phase. I do the sales in my company, and the ones responsible for deployment in my company are from another sales team. In the past, during the initial years of Cisco, I was involved in deployment.

Regarding the ease of deployment, I am 100 percent sure that it is the easiest solution. Also, I have already worked before, even in Cisco Portfolio.

My customers have seen an ROI using the solution, mainly considering the time it shows the attacks and what the threats are. Personally, I saw a presentation to suppliers with the title stating SaaS is the newest SOC's best friend, and this is a reality. I have a customer, the biggest bank in Brazil, and they adopted Cisco Umbrella's DNS Security Advantage as one of the main features in the SOC, which is integrated into the bank, which is one of the most valuable for the customer.

Cisco Umbrella now has a good price in the basic packages. When it comes to Cisco Umbrella SIG Essentials package and Cisco Umbrella Secure Internet Gateway (SIG) Advantage package, it depends on whether the project has a good price or not. For example, we are not able to choose the SWG feature without l3 and l4 firewalls. Some vendors have that possibility. So, we know this has a price, and this has value for the customer. But most of my customers that are using Umbrella SIG Essentials don't have l3 and l4 firewalls. So, this is a problem. 

With the new features that are being introduced in Cisco Umbrella, I think we will have a new price list, and maybe things could change. Considering Umbrella for the SIG Advantage package and full feature competition against ZScaler or Netskope, they need to add all their packages. Usually, the SIG Advantage package has a markup price.

When it comes to securing my customer's infrastructure from end to end so that they can detect and remediate threats, I would say that, in general, I have had a good experience. Sometimes, just enabling Cisco Umbrella POV and the fact that DNS trust is going through Cisco Umbrella is the easiest way to show and close a lot of bad traffic nowadays. Also, 80 percent of campaigns use any kind of malicious DNS infrastructure. So now, it's very, very easy to detect such traffic.

Cisco Umbrella has helped customers consolidate any tools and applications. I say this because, with Umbrella, it is very easy to see what the users are using through the internet, especially with the basic packages.

Speaking about what effect Cisco Umbrella's ability to consolidate tools or applications has, I would say that, in general, it is easy to see what Umbrella is blocking. In some cases, for example, customers who have used traditional endpoint security solutions sometimes think that they are safe because they didn't have any alerts using that. But when these customers implement Cisco Umbrella, they realize the real scenario. It has a positive impact because today, it is able to see the real traffic and the really bad things that are inside their networks.

Regarding whether Cisco Umbrella helped to improve cybersecurity, I would say that with Cisco Umbrella, it is easier to handle the incidents because they have more information that should handle the problems and improve security in general. The base, or the first layer, I think, is the way you improve resilience.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. After Cisco Channel Partner program's release, I may probably rate it a ten out of ten.

We use Cisco Umbrella to deploy policies and configurations for our company internally and some customers.

We use a lot of different Cisco products like Endpoint and Umbrella. With Cisco Umbrella, we get a total picture of security internally, especially for external sources or malware threats. I've only deployed it on one customer, and it's working well so far. We're still going through the full deployment process, but the customer likes the solution, which has worked well.

DNS protection, domain blocking, SIP component, and the Cisco Umbrella roaming client are the valuable features of Cisco Umbrella. With the way the industry is now, even if you're not in the network, you could still get the policies for your organization applied to your computer via the actual hardware or the user.

Cisco Umbrella should add some more documentation on proxies. Different organizations utilize proxies in their environment. With Umbrella, based on my experience, there are some deployment issues. It would be good to have some more documentation that can walk you step by step. The tech support is about 90% and needs to provide more step-by-step processing of the procedure and also a little more background on the solution.

I have been using Cisco Umbrella for about a year.

Cisco Umbrella has good stability.

Cisco Umbrella's scalability works fine. If it's in the cloud and you're pointing to the Cisco Umbrella DNS servers, the more users you have, you add a bigger package or a bigger tier.

Cisco Umbrella's technical support is pretty good. The biggest thing with Cisco support is that you need to ensure you provide all the necessary information. If you give a vague problem, they will give you a lot of potential solutions. With Cisco support, if you get more granular with your information and accurate documentation, you should be able to find a good solution. They usually are very helpful and useful.

Positive

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.

The basic package of Cisco Umbrella with the DNS component has been implemented in our customer's network and started working right away. I check the logs, and both the logs and the policy are working. You get a good return on investment from the very basic package in the beginning. You get those same benefits as you move up to the top tiers.

Cisco Umbrella has four tiers, and with each tier, there are different levels of abilities in those packages. You get what you pay for if you break the solution up into tiers.

Cisco Umbrella is deployed via the cloud in our organization.

I would give Cisco Umbrella nine out of ten for securing our infrastructure from end to end. The solution does what it's stated that it would do. With different packages, you get different levels of security. However, the main component of Cisco Umbrella was the DNS component or the DNS protection, which it does very well.

Once you first deploy Cisco Umbrella, you might not have to go back and update the policy config. However, in and of itself, it still requires a level of project time, deployment, design, documentation, and implementation.

I deployed an integration between SecureX and Umbrella for one of our customers. I can jump on SecureX and see if there's any block. I can read the information on SecureX, and then if I need to go to Umbrella, I can click the launch icon, and it will take me right there. That's pretty good and useful.

Cisco Umbrella's ability to consolidate tools has had a good effect on our customer's security infrastructure. SecureX is a big component for a lot of Cisco security suites, and they can integrate all that together. We've integrated a lot of our Cisco products into that one SecureX platform. I don't particularly deal with the internal because that's more our IT department. However, I've viewed the dashboard, and it's very useful. With the customer, we deployed Endpoint, we deployed Umbrella, and we'll be deploying Duo, and then those things can be integrated into SecureX.

Cisco Umbrella's DNS and SecureWeb Gateway components have helped improve our organization's cybersecurity resilience. More granular policies could be built for security, implementation, and ensuring no threats enter our internal organization.

If you're looking for DNS protection without a bunch of firewall commands and configurations, a simple deployment, and a policy build, Cisco Umbrella is a good way to go. It's deployed in the cloud and not hard to deploy. So if you want to get something up and going right away, Cisco Umbrella is a good bet.

Implementing Cisco Umbrella into our environment was pretty easy. I worked on it, and once they gave me access, I did my research and built the policies in adherence to whatever they asked.

Overall, I rate Cisco Umbrella a nine out of ten.

We're using Cisco Firepower to replace the ASAs as perimeter firewalls to the university's network. We're predominantly using Cisco Umbrella for web filtering of staff and student web traffic that is generated from the university campuses.

Cisco solutions are simple, efficient, and effective. We're definitely seeing that our users are protected by using these solutions. We're using Cisco Umbrella to protect around 1,500 staff and about 15,000 to 16,000 students. At any one time, on our campus, we could have 3,000 student endpoints protected and about 1,500 members of staff with laptops who are working hybrid since COVID. So, they're protected when they're on campus and when they're off campus. As a university in Edinburgh with three main campuses, we have two internet connections where firewalls protect us from bad stuff on the internet.

Cisco solutions have invariably saved us time. Without them, we would've had ransomware attacks and cyber attacks. So, they have helped protect us as much as they can. I don't have the metrics, but it's a university, so we're probably quite often under attack.

Our operating expenditures (OpEx) haven't really reduced. With moving to subscription-based, our OpEx has probably gone up rather than our CapEx coming down. 

The insight into what our users are doing via Cisco Umbrella is valuable. Knowing that we're protecting our users as they leave our network is also valuable now because we've got more hybrid working. With Cisco Umbrella and Cisco Secure clients on all our hybrid working laptops, we know that our staff is secure even when they're working from home.

They should provide more integrations and bring things together so that there is a more standard feel to their platform. We also use Cisco ISE, and it has a very different feel from Cisco Umbrella. We also have some Meraki products which feel very different from others. It's like you have to learn something new with every product you buy.

We've had Cisco ASAs, but we're just in the process of replacing them with Firepower, so Firepower is quite new. We've been using Cisco Umbrella since 2020.

We have a good Cisco partner called Ping Network Solutions in Scotland, so anytime we need to reach out for a bit of advice, we can ask them. We had good pre-sale support with Cisco as well to ensure that we get the right products that match our requirements. I'd rate their customer service a nine out of ten.

Positive

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.

I was involved in its deployment although I had a technical team working underneath me. It was easier than Zscaler because Zscaler made us have two instances, one for staff and one for students. It was very complicated, and we had to route traffic in different ways. Being able to do it by DNS with Cisco Umbrella was just easy.

I managed the team that was deploying it. My role involved making decisions about what traffic and which groups of users we put through first, some early field tests, and things like that.

We did it all by ourselves.

We have seen an ROI. With Zscaler, we had more operational issues than we've had with Cisco Umbrella.

You get what you pay for.

We use Cisco Firepower, and we use Cisco Umbrella. Currently, these two products are not very integrated. We don't have the complete suite of Cisco solutions. We just have two that aren't joined. We also work with other technology partners, such as Microsoft, but in terms of the perimeter of our network, it has always been a solid product like the Cisco firewall.

I'd rate Cisco Umbrella a nine out of ten.

We use Umbrella to front-end all of our DNS requests and that way they protect any of our end-users from going to any kind of malicious site. It doesn't matter if they're in-house in one of our locations, or if they're remote and working from home. That was the biggest part was the fact that we could protect our end-users, even when they're not in the office.

We were actually trying to solve other challenges, which included just to protect the onsite, but once COVID hit, it pretty much made it a very easy transition for us. At one point, when COVID was at its highest peak, we had everyone working remotely. We didn't have to worry about how we were going to restrict our access on the internet, because Umbrella was already handling that for us.

It made us more secure, which is a very important thing for a financial institution.

The support for hybrid work was the biggest thing. It protects our users, whether they're in the office or they're out of the office. We get the same policy in both locations. We can assign policies based on individual group memberships and it travels with them no matter where they go. It helps no matter where they are.

Since it's based on user DNS requests, it's right from the endpoint all the way through the network to be able to identify those locations and restrict access if necessary. It's not just the malware sites, which is very important, but it's also just content in general. There are business reasons for restricting access to certain content.

Since we implemented Umbrella, we are seeing a fairly significant amount of threats being blocked. A good 20 percent of all the activity, on average, that we see is actually being blocked by Umbrella, because it's either violating policy or it's some kind of malware.

Both monitoring the activity, so that we can investigate anything that may pop up, and the ability to restrict the access, or filter out what content end-users can view or go to [are valuable features of Umbrella]. Also, the fact that it blocks them from any known malicious locations.

It works really well and the best part about it is the fact that it's transparent to the users until they try to go somewhere that's either restricted because of content or restricted because of the fact that it's malicious. Then they simply get a popup and that's all there is to it. So from their perspective, it's very easy. They don't have to do anything in order for it to work.

There is a single portal that we go to that handles being able to set up policy, look at activity, or even manually add sites that we think that we want to restrict, even if it's not considered a particular category or a particular malware. The single-pane-of-glass management is very important. We have a very small team. We can't spend a lot of time going from product to product to product to either investigate or set up policy. We need to have one place that we can go to and set everything up.

It's really easy. It's an easy portal to go to, it's cloud-based, so we can get to it from anywhere. The ability to set up the policy is pretty straightforward. There are a lot of tie-ins with other products, like SecureX and other things, that make it just as easy.

It's cloud-based, so as long as you can get to the cloud, you're golden.

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.

I have been using Cisco Umbrella for about four years now.

It's been extremely stable. In the last four years, I do not recall a single outage. There has been nothing that I can think of that actually affected the performance of the system at all in the last four years.

We've never had an issue with scale. We've scaled it up to every user that we have in-house. When we deployed the gateways, we deployed two for HA purposes, but from a scale perspective, it's DNS queries. It doesn't take much. Our whole organization is on it.

Support for Umbrella is very good. There's a way to contact them directly from within the portal and we use that periodically.

I give them about a nine out of 10. There are issues with Cisco's tech support, like all the rest of them.

Positive

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.

There were two pieces of the deployment. One was the cloud deployment, which got us set up in the cloud to begin with. We also had gateways that were installed on-prem, in-house.

We were able to get the gateways up and running in about an hour. The cloud deployment was all done by the Umbrella organization on the back-end side. To deploy to the end users, all we needed to do is set up a policy that said, "This is what you use for DNS." Once that was set up, we were done. Deploying that was done in a group policy and that group policy was pushed in a matter of minutes. The entire solution was probably deployed in just a few hours.

We did it all ourselves. Cisco handled the back-end side with the portal itself, but the rest of it, we did ourselves.

I think we got our return on investment within the first month of its use, because of the increased security that we had in the organization; the ability to have a product that is protecting our end-users. We do educate our end users today, but Umbrella doesn't require us to go through as in-depth an education process to say, "Okay, you're going to have to do the research. You're going to have to figure out what sites are bad. You're going to have to figure out where not to go." We don't have to do any of that. That's all handled by Umbrella. We just need to let them know that we're protecting them on the back-end side.

Its value exceeds its pricing.

We looked around to see what was available. There were a lot of content filtering solutions available, but one of the things that Umbrella brings, in addition to content filtering, is that awareness of known threat sites. Their tie-in with Talos, Talos being that organization that does all that research and feeds that into Umbrella, means that we not only have known malware sites from six months ago, but we're getting feeds from Talos within hours.

The impact on our employees' morale has been good. Anytime the employees understand that we're doing something from a technology standpoint to secure the organization more, that makes them happy. It's something that they don't have to concern themselves with as much and it improves morale quite a bit.

Resilience in cyber security is extremely important. We're a financial institution, so cyber security is very high on our organizational goals, all the time. Making sure that cyber security is resilient against any of the latest attacks that are coming out is extremely important. It's a constant thing. Cyber attacks are increasing every single year. The methods that are being used are increasing every single year. If something were to happen, not only would we have a financial impact, but we have a reputational impact. For a financial institution, a reputational impact could be just as devastating as a financial one.

Umbrella helps us with that overall security. It gives one less attack vector for the bad guys to get into. We're protecting those end-user devices and we're protecting those end-users from going to places that could be malicious. The fact that it's doing that for those end-users increases our overall security without us having to rely specifically on end-user education in that particular attack vector.

For leaders who are looking to increase resilience within their organizations, I would say that what is necessary is to do as much security, in-depth, as you can. That includes using Umbrella to protect your users and using lots of other security products and being able to secure every aspect of your organization.

I would rate Umbrella absolutely a 10 out of 10. It's literally a lifesaver when it comes to being able to protect our endpoints.

Cisco is a very efficient and on-point solution that controls the whole network and settings on one page. We can monitor the entire network.

The solution could be faster as the process is very slow.

I have been using Cisco Umbrella as a reseller for four to five years.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight and a half out of ten.

We have deployed it to small businesses.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward and takes few hours to complete.

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

ROI is pretty good. I rate it as eight out of ten.

You need to buy an additional license for customer services. The licensing is moderate.

I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution as eight and a half out of ten.

We use Cisco Umbrella to protect our DNS queries and the traffic going out.

Cisco Umbrella is transparent to my users; they are unaware of its presence. The documentation they use is solely for the IT staff. It is functioning exceptionally well, to the point where I no longer require extensive documentation for its operation.

It has reduced malware and mitigated risks associated with email links and various other factors, resulting in cost savings.

Cisco Umbrella helps secure our infrastructure, enabling us to effectively detect and remediate threats. Apart from host-based firewalls or malware attempting to bypass threat detection, we currently do not have any other alternatives. Although there may be competing solutions available, we have been using Umbrella, and it has served us well.

Cisco Umbrella helps free up IT staff time indirectly by reducing the number of calls we receive regarding malware or bad calls.

Our organization improved its cybersecurity resilience by effectively blocking threats with Cisco Umbrella.

We used one feature, which is aimed at protecting our users from accessing malware-infected websites and encountering associated problems.

I am unsure if Cisco Umbrella offers a Windows option for running the server. However, since I am not familiar with Linux, I had to rely on someone else to handle that aspect. I'm not completely convinced that using Windows would be a superior solution, as Linux is generally regarded as more stable. However, it would benefit individuals like myself who are unfamiliar with Linux.

I have been using Cisco Umbrella for seven years.

I haven't needed to reboot the servers for years due to their excellent stability.

For the size we have, Cisco Umbrella has worked out really well in terms of scalability.

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

I have seen a return on investment using Cisco Umbrella.

The pricing model is easier compared to some of the other solutions, and it is also competitive.

I rate Cisco Umbrella a nine out of ten.

I recommend that people try Cisco Umbrella because I believe it is the best option available.

I have never needed to utilize technical support because the solution has consistently functioned effectively.

I had implemented Cisco Umbrella at a previous company. I'm now working at another company where I'm not using this solution. We've got another solution here.

The policy of the company was to make sure all outgoing traffic was sent through a filtering service, and OpenDNS, and then Cisco Umbrella, was chosen for that purpose. Once it was taken over by Cisco Umbrella, it had far more capacity and far more functionality written into it. 

In terms of the deployment model, I just used Cisco services. It would be through Cisco's private cloud. My site wasn't big enough. So, I didn't deploy the Cisco service on-premises. 

It was really valuable to me in protecting the outgoing data of the company. It was good for reporting. Every computer had the Cisco Umbrella program installed. So, I had good reporting on any issues related to outgoing data, such as whether there were any phishing or dodgy sites connected. It protected that part of the business.

A combination of Cisco ASA, Cisco Umbrella, and Cisco AMP connecting to the SecureX portal gave me all-around security for the site because they all reported into a central reporting server. If there were any issues, I could have got full details, even if a crypto locker attempt was made. I never had any security incidents that I'm aware of. So, it was a very effective tool.

It kept itself updated. So, I didn't have to worry about continuing to push out new installs of the program.

I felt safe, supported, and secure, and so did the owner of the company. It worked silently in the background, and no one else really knew it was working on their computers. When we went into lockdown with COVID, I was happy knowing that all the computers that left the business had the app installed and were going to be functioning securely. We got no viruses and no issues on any computer on the network, which is quite unusual. A lot of other people or a lot of other companies I spoke to reported that they had quite a few issues.

It worked 100% in terms of applying and maintaining network connectivity consistently across all workplaces. We never had any issues. The only issues we had were when sites might have been blocked because they were suspected of being within a filtering group. It would report back to the user and say, "This site is currently blocked by your administrator. Please click this button. An email will be sent to your administrator, and they can resolve the issue." I would then get the email, and I'd look at the site, and then I'd release it through whitelisting. It was very user-friendly in that regard.

It certainly helped to remediate threats more quickly because I was able to stay free of any virus outbreaks. It definitely locks out that part of the transmission where the virus will go out and attempt to download a package.

It worked silently and didn't use too many computer resources. It was really silent in its operation on the network. It had a really good impact on me. I'd love to put it in my new company, but we've gone down a different pathway. That's being resolved through Office 365 now, and I'm not proposing to change that technology.

I wanted to ensure that all outgoing traffic went through Cisco AMP servers. So, if we did get a crypto locking incident or any malicious sites that wanted to direct traffic to particular websites, they would be unable to do that because they would be blocked by the Cisco Umbrella DNS servers.

It also did website filtering for preventing access to porn sites and gambling sites. It had all other standard features. It had a good section where you could whitelist and blacklist websites.

I was able to implement it myself. It was really easy to install. You could install it on a server locally if you want to. If you have the biggest site, you would do that, but for my site, it was just directing all the traffic out through the Cisco Umbrella DNS. It was really handy. When the owners of the company went overseas, I knew that they would be secure because even if they were not on the company network, they would still go through the Cisco Umbrella servers. It was a complete solution for protecting the company with outgoing data.

The other useful feature was that if we were to get a malicious actor onto a server or service running somewhere, it would still have to go out through the Umbrella servers. So, it would more likely be blocked through there. It had multiple features that were super handy.

It had the ability to do a lot of app control. So, every single app that went through that portal was registered, but there is a general issue with the whole app control. As soon as you add a mobile phone to your network, all of the apps get registered through the system, and you can approve, reject, or just let them go through. When I looked at it, it was impossible to manage app control. There was just so much data. I didn't apply that service because I just didn't have the time to manage it. It would be good if there was a way to categorize applications. However, that's dangerous too because you can be turning off an app in a group because you don't know what it is doing. It could be a vital company app. So, App control is the main area in which they need to keep working.

Originally, Cisco Umbrella was called OpenDNS. I have used OpenDNS and Cisco Umbrella for about six years.

It is very stable. I never had any issue with it.

It is highly scalable. You don't even have to install it on your computers. You just change your DNS, and it'll start to work internally immediately. I never had any issues with performance or anything like that. I'm sure it would suit larger companies as well, but larger companies would install their own Umbrella service on their own systems and deal with the capacity that way. So, it is very scalable.

Their support is good. They always got back to me and answered issues. They showed me how to do my own debugging. They were always very professional and helpful. I would rate them a 10 out of 10.

Positive

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

It was super easy. I'm a general IT person, and I was able to deploy it. I read the documentation, changed some settings, changed the DNS on my servers, and then rolled it out to the team. It was a pain-free implementation.

I deployed it. It was pretty intuitive. I didn't have a consultant help me. I was able to implement the solution myself and manage it myself. That's a really good rating for an application. There are different systems you get to manage these days, and you can't have training on all of them. Because I rolled it out, I knew I rolled it out properly, and the system was working effectively. It was good. I liked using it.

The return on investment was that we kept the company secure. Nothing happened, which is the ultimate return on investment.

It was a little bit expensive on a per seat basis, but the company I was running was only a midsize Australian company, and it was a reasonable budget per computer for that system.

It started off being a free product, and then Cisco bought it, and it went to a reasonable price. I was using Cisco AMP as well. So, my per computer cost was reasonably high, but for a small company, it was within an acceptable level.

Not having reviewed other systems, I can't tell how they compare, but I know that when you do special security licensing with Microsoft, it is on par. So, it is probably standard within the industry.

At the time, we were using OpenDNS, and then OpenDNS went to Cisco Umbrella. Because we'd had such success with OpenDNS, we just stayed on with the product. So, I didn't evaluate any other products at that time.

It is just another layer that you need to wrap around your company to keep it safe unless you could just shut off that possible attack vector from external parties.

To leaders who want to build more resilience within their organization, I would say that they've got to keep doing it, and they've got to keep working on it. I'm constantly looking for better ways to secure the company. Cisco Umbrella would be a very useful addition to their set of tools. 

A part of my plan in the long term was to implement the full suite. I never got around to that, but it was really good to know that I could go right down to app-level control. It was a very successful product, and I'd certainly recommend it to any business looking to just add another layer of security around their company.

In terms of providing a single pane of glass management, security does involve multiple systems, and I could log them all into the Cisco SecureX system. From there, I could get my single point where I could resolve issues with viruses, et cetera. So, in itself, it was a single pane of glass for DNS protection. It was fine, but I don't think there is ever going to be a single pane of glass anywhere. You're always going to have many different systems that you're using, but overall, it had a lot of features. It did the job it needed to do.

I would rate it a 9 out of 10. It is just app control that I want them to develop more.

We're an MSP. We implement it for customers, and we also use it in our organization.

I'm not a technical guy. From my perspective, as an executive, it gives us more peace of mind knowing that our traffic is secure. There's basically an extra layer of security for all our traffic, so our customers' data is secure, and our own data is more secure. There's just peace of mind for me.

It does a pretty good job of securing the infrastructure from end to end. We're happy with it. That's the internet gateway security that we sell. There are other competitors out there, but it's agnostic to equipment. It very easily integrates with our customer base, which is mostly Meraki. The dashboard and reporting are very easy and very transparent for our customers, so we can do a good job of explaining to them their issues, what's been mitigated, and what're the advantages. They have visibility over why they're paying for this service. 

It has helped us to consolidate tools. We use most of Meraki. It's from top to bottom, so everything is in a single pane of glass.

It has definitely saved time and money. We're able to onboard a customer for a trial in minutes, so after a sales pitch call, we can onboard them the same day. That's pretty amazing.

It has improved our cybersecurity resilience to the point that we haven't had issues. In security, not having issues is very good. We're able to keep up with the threats with a partner like Cisco and make sure that the best practices are met both at the on-premise level with the firewalls and then over the cloud. When they're not in the office or when they're remotely working, everything is secure.

For our scope or type of customers, which are retail customers with many branches, as an MSP, we take care of everything related to security. It allows us to manage many customers at the same time, and it allows the customer to focus on the other aspects of their business and leave the cybersecurity and networking to us.

For us and for customers, it's the ease of integration with Meraki. It's just a couple of clicks. That allows us to deploy very fast, and it doesn't change the way a customer uses his service. It's just more secure.

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.

We've been using Cisco Umbrella for about a year.

We've implemented it for maybe a thousand users.

That's pretty good. I'd rate them a nine out of ten. More Spanish would be better for our techs. We're based in Panama.

Positive

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.

It's deployed on the cloud, but I wasn't involved in its deployment.

We've seen an ROI with this product.

In terms of licensing, we're not able to be extremely clear with the customer because it's based on their reporting. It's not based on the actual traffic. If they say they have 50 users but they have 80, we'll just buy for 50 users. That's something where we'd like to have more flexibility.

Overall, I'd rate Cisco Umbrella a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement, but it's very good.