Cisco Umbrella Reviews

We use Cisco Umbrella as a security layer for all our employees. We deployed it two years ago as a security solution in order to cover our roaming workforce. Our employees are scattered throughout more than 20 locations, including homes and hotspots, and we had to cover the security gap. We needed to be sure that regardless of the location our employees would be covered by the security features.

To provide connectivity to our members, we use Cisco Meraki. When our employees are within the co-working space, we use the integration with Cisco Umbrella security and the Meraki network.

The reports and notifications are the most useful part of the platform. As soon as you deploy the security layers, the reporting is very comprehensive. It helps you to have, at a glance, a clear view of what's going on.

The integration between Cisco Secure solutions is pretty good. We have been able to deliver the solution in a few days. The integration of Umbrella and Meraki is literally one click away from the customer.

One of the reasons why we chose Umbrella was its capability to perform end-to-end detection of malware and web traffic. In the last two years, we have been covered, detection has been faster, and we have been able to contain some potential threats along the way. We use the Umbrella stack from DNS protection to web and content protection. Our workforce is made up of 150 Macs; thus, we use Mac as a client. We have some PCs and integration with the network in our co-working spaces.

Utilizing Cisco Secure has helped us save time. Being a nimble organization, we don't have IT staff who are fully dedicated to security. The maintenance is also not very time-consuming. In terms of the amount of time saved, it would be half an FTE a year, given the fact that we are informed and notified when threats arise.

In terms of operating expenditures, we have been able to negotiate a better cyber insurance rate with our insurance company due to the fact that we are covered by Umbrella.

Another benefit of using Cisco Umbrella is application scanning. We have been able to understand how many other applications we were consuming in the cloud, address them, and save money. Without Cisco Umbrella, we would not have realized that we had so many cloud applications in the company.

We have been able to close at least four or five applications that were duplicates of others that we were already using in the company. We have realized approximately 10,000 to 12,000 euros a year of immediate savings in an organization of 150 people, which is quite significant.

Client delivery and client updates should be improved. Client delivery was not as easy as expected. Another area for improvement is the integration of escalation procedures for security issues.

In the next release, I would like to see the addition of notification flows like SMS and popups.

Cisco Umbrella is stable. We have had some issues, for example, when deploying from home or from slow networks, but 99% might be covered by a backup deployment of the client.

The moment Cisco Umbrella is installed, it scales. It's a matter of deploying policies. You can scale from one to thousands or tens of thousands of clients very quickly.

We are mainly supported by our partner. We escalate to Cisco's technical support when needed, and they are always outstanding. I would rate them at ten out of ten.

In my environment, the initial deployment was not as easy as we expected it to be. The delivery of the client in a Mac environment was not that easy, and the fact that we do not have a directory made things a bit more complicated. On the other hand, as soon as we were able to deliver the client, everything went well. We were able to deploy the solution in one week.

We were supported by our partner both on the network side and the security side. Being a solution focused on the client, we involved the partner for support on the endpoints, which are the critical part of the delivery.

Our experience working with our partner was good because they know our organization and our needs. When you increase security, you may see a higher number of false positives. Our partner played a key role resolving any issues that arose for the customer during deployment.

Cisco Umbrella is not a cheap product. However, it's not a matter of the cost; it's more a matter of the value of security. It is easy to measure this value when you have a security incident. I think the price is a good trade-off for a product that can help you avoid security threats.

You can try to partner as much as you can with insurance and other companies. It can help you reduce acquisition costs.

We had several reasons for choosing Cisco Umbrella, including the rise in attacks, the need to be careful with our customers' information, and our desire to have an extra layer of information security.

The main reason for going with Cisco Umbrella versus other competing solutions was its capability to integrate with our network. The first deployment we did was pure DNS and was a client deployment. Then, we were sure that we wanted to have a deeper integration. The fact that we are 100% running on Meraki infrastructure helped us to have this blended architecture, which is very efficient from the point of view of the client, service, and security.

If you're considering Cisco Umbrella, my advice would be to take your time and have 10% to 20% of your company pilot the solution. It's a solution that is easy to pilot in a specific environment, even with very deep integration with the network. I would advise you to go with a good use case, pilot the solution, and then move forward with a broader deployment.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco Umbrella at nine.

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 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.

We're actually in the process of using this to replace our current web proxies. We use both, side-by-side, at the moment. The plan in the future is to eventually get those replaced with Umbrella so that we can have an overall, overarching proxy either that's based in the cloud or whatever we need. But this currently is our most convenient way of replacing web proxies across all of our locations at our company.

It's definitely made things more centralized. Our current setup is that we have proxies, either physical or virtual, throughout our different locations. Each location has its own proxy at the moment. What's nice about Umbrella is that we can just go into the site and see all of our locations in one place and look at all of our computers, users—everything. It's not divided into separate proxies that we have to go into and figure out which person's using which proxy. Umbrella lets us just see everybody at once, which is really handy for us, and we don't have to spend too much time messing around with figuring out who's where and which location needs this change. [We can just make] changes throughout every location at once, rather than one at a time with those proxies that we currently use.

The past couple of years, [the fact that the solution helps support hybrid work has been] especially important because now we can't use those proxies if people aren't onsite. The way our network was set up was that we had it filtering through the firewall and the firewall was taking certain subnets and filtering those through the proxy. But obviously, when people work from home, we had to get a VPN connection set up. Before COVID, we did not have a work-from-home solution at the time, so everybody had to be in the office. Obviously, that all changed very quickly and Umbrella became a much bigger priority for us because that was our main replacement for those proxies at the time.

We had to expedite the process of setting it up, but what was nice about Umbrella was that it was so user-friendly, it was so easy to set up on our end, that it didn't take as much time as we thought it would. It just simplified the entire process throughout the couple of years that we have especially needed it. But what's cool about that is that now, it's a permanent part of our network. Thanks to the last couple of years, we use it all the time now. It wasn't just a temporary solution for hybrid work because now we use it for both. We have the ability to do hybrid work, but we also have the ability to use it for our employees onsite as well.

[When it comes to threat remediation] most of it is automatic so we don't really have to worry about it too much. Umbrella will just block something if it detects it as malware. That is a super convenient feature for us, that we don't have to manually review every single site. If we do have to review a site, it's nice to have that investigative tool. We put in the URL and it gives us a risk score, depending on how dangerous that site might be. That's super helpful for us to analyze that site, take a look at it, and make a decision on whether we need to block it, or if it can be unblocked. Every situation is different, but Umbrella makes that summary page very convenient for us. It allows us to make decisions much faster and more efficiently.

Our cyber team is a bit different from our network team. We have a separate team for that, but it's nice because they also use Umbrella for a lot of that, depending on what the site is. We use the investigative tool for the risk score, but it also comes with a few other tools, and part of that is just so that they can assess what's safe and what's not safe and what might be detected as malware. Obviously, they have other tools for that as well, so Umbrella is just one cog in the big system. But it definitely allows for easier communication between our teams because we both use it and we can both understand it. It's user-friendly enough so that we can make decisions with them based on what Umbrella tells us and how we interpret that information depending on the site, the situation, the risk score, everything.

We have a lot of employees, a few tens of thousands. We get probably hundreds [of threats blocked] every day. I wouldn't be able to give an exact number on how many are blocked. The main ones we look at are the ones that people request us to specifically look at because they might not think that something was supposed to be blocked, or something is not working properly, and we can go in and investigate that. But there are probably hundreds to thousands of blocks per day on the sites, across all of our locations. That automation allows us to relax a little bit easier and know that our network is much safer with Umbrella on it than it is off. The automatic side of it is basically saving our jobs. That really helps, and we're able to look at anything. Overall, as a program, it has saved us a ton of time and stress by not having to worry about malware or viruses or anything malicious.

One of the coolest features, for me at least, is to be able to type in a website and have it  give an overall summary of how safe that website appears. Part of that is just so that we can investigate. And if there's any sort of confusion between our cyber team and us, we can look further into that site and dive more into that risk score that Umbrella gives us. We can just analyze [those sites] and make sure that we're unblocking safe sites and blocking sites that we deem could be harmful for our employees.

I would say it provides single-pane-of-glass management. We still, of course, use those old WSAs, but in the long run, our plan is to get those replaced with Umbrella. We have locations in Japan, Korea, China. So it's a little bit more difficult to go through one proxy for all of those, especially because it's a bit slower. What's nice is, [with] Umbrella being in the cloud, we can just go into the site, see everything from the management console in that page. Nothing is slow [and] nothing is hosted by us so that we don't have to worry about network issues or management issues. Everything is just laid out right in front of us from the Umbrella dashboard on the internet, in the cloud. And that makes it super helpful for us to just manage all that from one spot across all of our locations across the world.

We aren't a very big team, so that's the main thing. Going through filtering web traffic or blocking sites or unblocking sites, whatever we need to do, can be a bit tedious, especially when we have all these different locations and we would have to go into each location specifically to perform these tasks. Umbrella, being one pane for managing, being all-encompassing, allows us to quickly go in, make a change, and it applies to either every location, if we want it to, or we can have policies in place that only apply to certain users or certain computers. And that makes it super useful for us because we're not messing around with jumping into all these different locations and manually doing each and every one individually. It is extremely helpful for us and it improves efficiency exponentially.

I have personally been using Cisco Umbrella for almost a couple of years. Our company implemented it about five or six years ago. Most of that time was spent getting it set up, but we've really been using it more within the last two or three years now, so it's still pretty new to us at the moment.

[In terms of maintaining network connectivity] obviously it depends on the situation. With Umbrella, it's a bit easier, for sure. There are times where Umbrella, on their side, is having an issue and we're notified of that issue. But in that case, there isn't really much on our side that we can do. To that extent though, the pros outweigh the cons. It's pretty rare that Umbrella is having a problem. The way that our network is set up is that we can reroute traffic pretty quickly using our other Cisco devices, so it's not usually a big issue for us. We have fewer problems with Umbrella than we do with our physical WSA proxies that we currently use, because that is something that we would have to troubleshoot on our end, and we're not always there on site to be able to do that. Then we have to go through someone else who's over there and they have to console us in and we have to troubleshoot whatever's going on over there.

With Umbrella, it's nice to have them tell us what's going on so that we're aware of the situation. If there are any problems, then we'd know what the issue was and how we could work around it. That makes it a bit simpler for us.

Network connectivity isn't really a huge issue for us with Umbrella, specifically. Our use case mainly is just for blocking internet traffic, making groups. We have social media groups where we allow certain computers in places to have access to certain social media sites that we wouldn't normally do. We have other sites being blocked, depending on their use case. That's mainly our function with Umbrella. Internet connectivity is usually not a huge issue regarding Umbrella with us, but if it ever is, it's nice that they communicate the issue to us, [so] that we can work around it.

In my experience with Umbrella support, sometimes the response times take a bit more time than we would like. Obviously, it depends on how they're contacted. But usually, when I contact them via phone, their support team is great. They help me out with everything. But sometimes, if you go through email, it can take quite a while to get a response. Obviously, if it's through email, the issue's probably not as pressing as it would be through a phone call, but the response times could be a little bit better. Email, I usually just avoid. I usually just call them now.

They're super helpful. In terms of response times, it could be a little bit better. Some issues are more urgent than others, but if it's an urgent issue, obviously we just call. Sometimes it takes a little bit [of time] for them to get back. I would probably rate them a seven out of ten.

Neutral

We've had to deploy connectors across certain locations, but [in] all the locations we have a domain controller and that needs to be deployed on those domain controllers throughout all of our different places. I've done a couple of deployments. Most of it was already deployed just by the time I got here. 

[In] my experience of how deployment went, it was very easily laid out, very simple. The instructions were super clear. I didn't have any issues with that. As more of a newcomer to the entire industry, this has been much easier than I expected it to be. Umbrella, as a product, is very simply laid out, very user-friendly. I couldn't praise it enough for helping me out with my job. 

While the support [can] sometimes take a while, overall they're super helpful, they make it very easy and they make you feel like you're not doing anything wrong. They're super friendly and make everything super easy for you. Umbrella as a product, overall, is very user-friendly, as a newcomer to my company.

The plan is to replace those physical proxies that we have. In terms of return on investment, getting rid of those across each location [has been valuable]. In terms of the efficiency with time, it's definitely saved us a lot of time and money troubleshooting different issues and securing the network and helping people access what they need to access. Just in terms of time and efficiency, it definitely has a return on investment.

Trying to replace those physical ones as well, getting rid of those, just having this be the all-encompassing way of filtering traffic and unblocking, of making policies, it definitely saves us a lot of time with the solution that's offered.

In terms of [our employees] feeling supported, they have the ability to submit a request to us very easily. When they get blocked from a site, it's not just one page saying you're not allowed here. They have the ability to submit a request to us so that we can look further into that site. That makes our employees feel more included in the process of helping the company access the sites that it needs to use, [as does our] communicating with those employees [about] why a site might be blocked; or a site that needs to be blocked based on what they find and what they're doing for their job. The important thing is that they're able to talk to us in case there's a site that they think that they need to access and helps them feel included in the entire process.

Like I mentioned earlier, it's one cog in the big system that we have out of our solutions for cybersecurity. We also use products like AMP, we have certain firewalls that also block certain things, the way they're configured. But overall, Umbrella, if we're talking about users on the internet, using sites or accessing different websites, is a big help in determining what exactly they need. We can go into Umbrella and help them understand why something might be blocked, or if they need to get into something, we can make certain policies within Umbrella. It's obviously just one tool out of the many that we have, so these configurations are pretty involved and even I don't know how they all work. It's divided amongst our team. For cybersecurity in general, it's great. It simplifies it. It's very useful in terms of the automation and how it blocks everything, and how all that stuff is interconnected. I would say that it is a lifesaver for us.

As somebody who is pretty familiar with networks and just learning everything, but being an inexperienced network manager, I would say that it makes the entire process very painless, very super simple to understand. In my experience, it's a nine out of ten.

We use Cisco Umbrella for DNS security. We also have the roaming clients deployed on user laptops.

We use it for roaming clients. We also push all our DNS traffic to Umbrella. We do not allow any other DNS traffic. That is kind of how we have fully implemented Umbrella.

We were looking to bridge the gap for DNS security, especially for mobile clients. We wanted to be able to put that roaming client on their PCs and kind of bring that together.

It has improved our organization from a security posture perspective. We feel more confident now knowing that we can block phishing attempts or any type of malware that is DNS-related. This is a very nice feature that provides peace of mind.

Umbrella has absolutely helped us remediate threats more quickly. In fact, it has blocked a lot of threats that may have been able to go through in some instances. Knowing that they are blocking it and being able to find the PC that potentially has the threat on it, that has been very beneficial.

Umbrella has been very good for employee morale. It makes our job a little bit easier.

Cybersecurity resilience is very important for our organization right now. Umbrella does a good job of blocking ransomware, malware, bad threat actors, and phishing attempts.

Being able to control policy sets has been a very nice feature. Being able to have appliances that are separate, where we can send DNS traffic, has been very beneficial as well.

It is a good product for helping workers feel safe, secure, supported, and included. Having the roaming client is probably one of the key factors in being able to do that.

Cisco Umbrella provides single-pane-of-glass management, which is pretty important for my organization. We have a lot of products, including security products, that we manage. Being able to see a lot of those data sets in a single pane of glass is very beneficial for my team. We enjoy having it. It is very easy to use.

It is not very difficult to maintain network connectivity. 

We would like them to add more features to Cisco Umbrella.

We have been using Umbrella for about four years.

Stability has been great. Obviously, there have been some hiccups here and there on the connectivity side. That is out of our control, but it is understandable, as things are in the cloud. I have had more issues with Amazon than I have had issues with Umbrella, where I have had a very good experience.

It is very scalable. If I had more sites, all I would have to do is deploy more VMs and point traffic that way, which is very nice.

We are using roaming clients. We are also using the DNS appliances that we have deployed. I have over 15,000 users and 10 locations. We have deployed each appliance at every location, and then point traffic to that. There are 20 different servers that we are using for Umbrella.

The technical support has been very good. I have not had to open many tickets. I have only opened two in the five years that we have had it. Those two times, the support was very nice and supportive. I would rate them as 10 out of 10.

Positive

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.

The initial setup is very straightforward. There is a lot of documentation available.

It was deployed in-house.

We have seen ROI. We can show our leadership that we are blocking and preventing things from coming into our network. Not only that, but from a threat perspective, if any of those things were able to infiltrate, then possibly the remediation damages would be way more than the cost that I am paying for Umbrella today.

As an educational partner, we get better licensing structures. We are very happy with that. It has been very nice that Cisco has partnered with the educational sector to bring that. 

Look for all the gaps that you have in your network, then try to find a product that is more rounded to essentially fill those gaps.

I would rate Umbrella as 10 out of 10.

One of our purposes for acquiring Umbrella was to block phishing links that we get in emails and to manage risky websites. We're using it for our internal network and the roaming client for external users.

Blocking malicious websites and preventing users from going into them, as well as the phishing attacks that usually come with malicious links, were the challenges. With Umbrella we can block them.

We use it in our Active Directory domain and for about 175 users. We use it on desktop computers and on laptops for external users. It's all on-premises, protecting servers and workstations.

It has improved our company a lot because we now see where the users are going and prevent them from going to malicious websites. It has reduced, by a lot, the chances of hackers getting into our organization.

With Umbrella, it's our IT staff who we feel secure. Sometimes the end-users, our clients, don't fully understand the purpose of the tools when we install them, such as the roaming client. And sometimes they get false positives and they don't fully understand why. But for us, as IT admins, we feel a lot more comfortable with the tool in place, because we know that it's unlikely our users will go to a malicious website. Umbrella is protecting us.

Umbrella has also helped us remediate threats more quickly. It's really good for securing our infrastructure from end to end. Umbrella's footprint is really small. If you want to secure infrastructure, such as servers, you don't have to install an agent. You just have to use DNS forwarders and point them to the umbrella servers. That's easier. It helps us protect our infrastructure for sure.

The Global Block List is one of the most valuable features because it's really easy to block domain names as well as URLs. Sometimes you don't want to block the whole site, you just want to block one URL. The Global Block and Allow Lists are the best features for us.

Cisco Umbrella also provides a single pane of glass for management. It's really helpful and it's important for us because we have multiple locations. Without a single pane of glass, if you want to block websites you have to go to every location, in each firewall, one by one. But when you have a single management portal, it's a lot easier.

The user experience is good because, as IT and admins, it's easy to use. But that's not only for admins, it's also true for the clients because they know the reason a website is blocked. The user experience is pretty smooth because they can report a false positive or a malicious website that has not been blocked in Umbrella. We are happy with the user experience.

And when it comes to applying and maintaining network connectivity consistently across all workplaces, Umbrella is excellent. We can track, among the different locations that we have, where the users are trying to get to. That means the risk of disruption is reduced by using Umbrella. And in that way, Umbrella contributes to maintaining network connectivity.

The user interface is pretty nice. Once you know how to do tasks, it's easy.

There are some situations where we would like to block things for specific user groups. I know that Umbrella does that, but it's not that easy. When you go to the Global Allow and Block Lists, that's the easy part. But when you want a specific task for specific rules and policies for user groups, you have to go three levels down in the menu, and it's hard to find where you do that task.

Also, the policies are not that easy to manage.

I have been using Cisco Umbrella for around a year and a half.

The stability is really good. They have about 99.99 percent uptime. I can't think of a significant disruption in the service.

We are a small organization, but from what I have seen, it is very scalable.

We have never requested support.

The initial deployment was straightforward.

The solution is on-premises but the management is cloud-based.

We did it all by ourselves.

We have seen return on investment by reducing the risk we had in the past. That has saved us from having to invest a lot of time in support, which is something we had to do when a user didn't know what they were doing and got infected. We now spend less time on end-user support.

The pricing is pretty fair. It's good.

In my former company, we used Area 1 for DNS protection, not Umbrella. I knew OpenDNS before it became Umbrella. In fact, I used OpenDNS for my personal accounts. In my current company we evaluated Area 1, but in the end, we loved Cisco's support and that is one of the reasons we went with Umbrella. But, obviously, the features in Umbrella are pretty good.

Once our end-users understood why we use Umbrella, that it was for improving our organization's security, it improved their morale. Nowadays, they are aware of cyber threats and they know that Umbrella is one of the tools that we use to prevent a breach. They feel more secure now.

Resilience helps a lot in cyber security. One of the things that makes Umbrella great is that you don't have to detect threats by yourself. Wherever in the world a new threat is detected, it's in the Global Block List of Umbrella and we don't have to manage those threats one by one.

That kind of resilience is more and more important for our organization every day. Fortunately, our C-level now understands the risks and what the organization could lose. They understand the impact. With the support of management, cyber security is really important for our organization.

I would tell the leaders of other organizations who want to build more resilience that cyber security is more important now because we are serving our internal and external customers. The problem with a cyber security risk, a threat or a disruption in IT services, is that it will probably cause us to stop producing what we produce. Our customers will have a bad experience, and that means it is not only a financial issue but one of reputation. I would tell such leaders to always keep cyber security in mind because it's not just about your IT guys, it's for the whole organization.

It's an excellent product. It has worked really well. The only reason I don't give it a 10 out of 10 is, as I mentioned, that there are some tasks that could be done more easily.

We use Cisco Umbrella to secure our gateway. All of the DNS forwarding coming out of the company from any site or all the DNS requests are forwarded through Cisco Umbrella, and then they determine if that is a safe address and if the content coming back is safe. They will either reject the addressing out of hand, or they'll look at the Layer 7 content and reject that from making it back to us.

We are using the Secure Internet Gateway (SIG) Advantage package. In terms of deployment, effectively, it's deployed from our private cloud. It's in our data closet on our servers.

It enables us to finally allow laptops to be used as workstations and allow data to leave the building. In the past, laptops were only used for VPN access, but they would connect back to their data inside the company. This has allowed us to have a level of confidence that they're protected as if they were behind our firewall. So, now, we've got work-from-home people who literally have their workstations with them.

We have six sites with 60 to 70 users. The baseline configuration allows for additional protection for any DNS requests as they leave those sites, and then the secondary policy is for the mobile devices as they leave the premises. When they're connected to public WiFi, they have an additional policy that kicks in for that time that they're not connected back to the company. So, when they're on public WiFi without a VPN, the tool will actually put that second policy in place that's more aggressive and offers a higher level of protection when it's not sitting behind the firewall. All that is automated. It's all built into the agent.

We don't allow WiFi inside of our network for connection to our actual business network. As soon as a device is docked, it disables WiFi on that mobile device.

When we have laptops that leave the building, they could connect to public WiFi before they establish a VPN connection back into the company. For that duration or that period of time when they're not docked in the network or on a VPN, they effectively don't have that full layer of security that I provide inside the building. This tool stands in during that period of time, and we extend the security settings through their basic firewall or their cloud-based firewall at that time. So, we do content filtering and control access, but they also are looking at new domains, IP addresses, and bad requests. They're blocking them on my behalf when a laptop is not sitting behind our security appliances.

There are a couple of interface issues. I know that they say that there are feature enhancements that are noted. For example, we've got the Cisco Meraki security appliances, and there, we geofence our company to where we're allowed to send and receive traffic. So, in our case, by default, we only allow traffic to six different countries, which allows us to effectively prevent traffic for the majority of bad players in the world, but they don't give you an easy way to do that in Cisco Umbrella. With Cisco Meraki, I can specify or pick the countries. I can say that I want to only allow traffic from these six countries, and I'm done. With Cisco Umbrella, I have to rely on the fact that they're going to prevent traffic to other countries. They're going to decide if it's good or bad. I can't geofence out. I can plot top-level domains, but .com and .net go global. I can certainly block a China (CN) or a Russia (RU) domain, but that doesn't give me the same level of granularity. 

Apparently, Cisco Umbrella has got that as a feature request to allow an administrator to say, "I specifically only want traffic to and from these countries. Everything else should be dumped." That way, when they're sitting behind my network or they go out in the wild, they have that same level of traffic being blocked.

I have been using it for 14 to 15 years.

We've had no issues. It has done exactly what it's supposed to do.

It is cloud-based. So, scalability should not be an issue. 

Any increase in its usage is all relative to the growth of our staff. Currently, we deploy the laptops for people who need to work from home or are traveling between the banks. That's roughly about 20% of our total staff. Some people aren't going to be working from home, and some of their jobs can't be done from home. They have no need for mobile devices. If there is a need to work from home, its usage will increase. It is there if we need it to scale, but at this point, it is not scheduled to change.

Once I became a paying customer, it was much better. The preliminary training is there, but when you get into the nuances and the details of some of its capabilities, you need to talk to tech support. Once you're a paid customer, you get direct access, and then it's good. When I'm able to get a hold of them, their technical support is a 10 out of 10.

Positive

I didn't use any similar solution previously. 

I was a hundred percent involved in its deployment. We had a couple of issues. The proof of concept was done without a lot of planning. So, there were some mistakes made along the way. If I was doing it again the second time, I wouldn't make the same mistakes. 

The default configurations have your baselines. Those are never supposed to get changed, and I changed and tweaked those for our proof of concept. After a couple of weeks, I had some additional guidance from the Cisco Umbrella team. You leave the baseline configuration, and then you clone and create a new configuration that sits in front of it. So, everyone gets the baseline, and you don't change that. If you want to change it, you make a new policy and then make the changes to that. If you change the baseline default policy and you make a mistake in it, you've to back that all out. If you make it in the new policy, in the worst case, you just delete it, and automatically everyone goes back to baseline. So, there's still a policy in effect. That was a training issue that should have been resolved. Now that I've done it, if somebody asks me, I would say that this is the way you've got to do it.

It was just me taking care of its deployment. In terms of maintenance, once it's configured, unless you're retweaking and adding or removing something that was blocked, it pretty much runs itself.

I have less maintenance to resolve, fix, and reconfigure VPN clients personally, and the feedback from the end-users is that they're more productive.

We were using the free version, and we implemented the paid version about two months ago.

I'm paying a fair price, but everything is negotiable with Cisco. One of the benefits that I got by having Cisco Umbrella is the licensing of the Cisco AnyConnect VPN client. There has always been an issue for years and years with Cisco Meraki in terms of VPN clients and using the native built-in Windows client. It keeps reconfiguring itself. By using Cisco AnyConnect as the VPN client, it's not affected by Windows patching or people typing in passwords by mistake. It's more resilient and doesn't change. With just Meraki solution, there was an extra expense for the Cisco AnyConnect VPN client. By having Cisco Umbrella, that licensing is now included.

There were a couple of other options, and I discussed them with another consultant. As a regulated industry, we have to do vendor management, and vendors have to be vetted. So, Cisco was already a vetted vendor. There are other companies that do the same thing, but Cisco didn't require me to do any more vetting. They were already a vendor.

When it's configured the way it's supposed to work, it turns itself on and off based on the status of the VPN or the dock condition. Once it's configured, it does exactly what it's supposed to do. 

If you're doing a proof of concept on it, fully understand how the policies are configured and what the flow is. You should understand the hierarchical status of the policies to configure it right the first time. You don't really want to guess it.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

We use the solution for DNS security and web filtering. Our industries include banking and insurance. 

The customer experience is very good, and the product improves security posture. 

Cisco Umbrella is difficult to manage and needs to include a dashboard. It needs to improve pricing as well. 

I have been using the product for three years. 

I rate Cisco Umbrella's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. 

The tool's deployment is easy; I rate it a nine out of ten. The speed of deployment depends on various factors, including our communication with other customer contacts.

I rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten. 

Cisco Umbrella is the best solution for DNS security in the market. Our customers are enterprise businesses. I rate it an eight out of ten.