Cisco Secure Access vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comparison

Cisco and Microsoft are both solutions in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category. Cisco is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.3, while Microsoft is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.5. Cisco holds a 6.4% mindshare in CASB, compared to Microsoft’s 6.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Access and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Secure Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

iboss

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.5%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Access is 6.4%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 6.9%, down from 10.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps	6.9%
Cisco Secure Access	6.4%
iboss	2.5%
Other	84.2%

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851

Managing Director

Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment

I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.

Read full review

Vasil Blagov

Manager, Network at Duracell International, Inc.

Easy management and security ensure reliable 24/7 connectivity

Zero Trust Network Access has helped my organization in securing standard applications because it's mandated to have it. It provides peace of mind knowing that we have that deployed in our network. Cisco Secure Access's ability to provide secure access via standard HTTP2, and optionally, QUIC protocol is good. It complies with the new standards. The impact of Cisco Secure Access on protecting my organization from phishing and ransomware threats has been good so far. We've been doing well with no threats.

Read full review

Frank Van Der Spek

Security and Continuity Manager at Rolinco NV

Deployment has been seamless with insightful data categorization and enhanced control

The features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that I have found most valuable include the overall portal view, with bubble graphs which give us insight into what goes where in the categorization, nowadays with Generative AI but all kinds of categorization, collaboration, etc. That central view of the portal is very useful for us. The impact of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps on our organization's ability to assess and manage app related risks has been significant because we have more visibility. Therefore, we can add more control, and we have already done so. This was not possible in the old solution, in the old CASB solution with Netskope. We now can see on the spot, and we do that almost weekly, what the end users are utilizing, which cloud providers or cloud apps they're using. The visibility into OAuth apps provided by Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is very good. The visibility into risk and risk management of our organization's Generative AI apps is very nice, as you can choose the category Generative AI and then see exactly what traffic has been going to and from Generative AI in the cloud. This makes us very insightful on what is used within the company. We have some policies on blocking specific Generative AI, and we use within our company one particular AI part, which is CoPilot of Microsoft. In this way, we can see what the end users are using other than CoPilot, and that makes us more in control. The effectiveness of the integration of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender XDR and defending against SaaS attacks is very intuitive. It works immediately if we create a new policy or in Purview or in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, or when we make an app unsanctioned by blocking it, then it is almost immediately, or at least within a couple of hours, effective on all the endpoints where the EDR is running. This gives us much better control over things than before.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."

"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."

"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."

"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."

"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."

"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."

"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."

"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."

More iboss pros

"The integrated capabilities of Cisco Secure Access deliver significant ROI through reduced mean time to detect (MTTD) and mean time to respond (MTTR), with resource efficiency notably improved as fewer personnel are needed for triage and system management."

"I find the zero trust approach helpful and beneficial in securing standard applications, which means you are accessing the applications directly instead of giving privilege to access the network itself."

"The product is giving whatever you need from a customer point of view."

"Cisco Secure Access provides application-level access, removes the dependency of VPN, and user authentications are continuously based on identity, device, and risk, which is an add-on there."

"I find the posture checking feature of Cisco Secure Access the most valuable."

"The most valuable feature is the authentication feature."

"I use this solution for securing security controls like Secure Security Control (SSC) for local Internet breakouts."

"Cisco Secure Access has benefited my organization by allowing people to connect 24/7, ensuring reliability."

More Cisco Secure Access pros

"It's very easy to install and it includes the Intune portal from Microsoft where I can control all the devices from one place."

"The product’s most valuable feature is SQL database."

"The impact of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps on our organization's ability to assess and manage app related risks has been significant because we have more visibility."

"Threat detection is its key feature, and that's why we use this tool. It gives an alert if a PC is attacked or there is any kind of anomaly, such as there is a spike in sending emails or we see an unauthorized website being accessed. So, it keeps us on our toes. We get to know that there is something wrong, and we can isolate the user and find any issues with it. So, threat detection is very robust in this tool."

"One of the most valuable features is auditing. Some of the other protection services have issues with auditing. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has an excellent auditing technique that helps us avoid the risk of filtering or information loss. You can use different tools to guarantee these things. It allows you to conduct an in-depth exploration of applications, users, and files that are harmful or suspicious. You can also enhance your security setup by creating personalized rules or policies that help you better control traffic in the cloud."

"The most effective features for data protection are data loss prevention (DLP) and data classification."

"If your business requirements are relatively simple, it can get the job done."

"On-demand scanning is the most valuable feature. In addition, it's a fairly fluid product. It syncs back to the cloud and provides metrics. It's pretty intelligent."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps pros

Cons

"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."

"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

"The reporting feature needs improvement."

"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."

"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."

"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."

More iboss cons

"Cisco Secure Access may not seamlessly integrate into such settings, although it performs well in a Cisco-based environment."

"The main issue with pricing is that it is higher compared to other competitors, making it challenging to work with customers unless they specifically request Cisco."

"Cisco Secure Access can be improved with more integration; the more integrations, the better. There are always third-party products that you might have, such as Carbon Black."

"Cisco is not well accepted in the market since they are somewhat behind their competitors."

"In my opinion, Cisco Secure Access could be improved by potentially incorporating features that other brands have been using. I see benefits from features offered by competitors, which could enhance the Cisco experience if adapted thoughtfully."

"We don't have any good tools right now, which is a problem."

"Cisco Secure Access can be improved with more integration; the more integrations, the better. There are always third-party products that you might have, such as Carbon Black."

"The way that we're using Cisco Secure Access today, it doesn't scale with the growing needs of our organization, however, if we leveraged more of the cloud services, it would fit better."

More Cisco Secure Access cons

"I would prefer to have filtering options incorporated within the policies, enabling the solution to perform tasks beyond mere blocking or allowing."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps' initial setup was quite technical but we were prepared. The time of the implementation depends on the job and how many users are being set up."

"Currently, reporting is not very straightforward and it needs to be enhanced. Specific reports are not included and you need to run a query, drill down, and then export it and share it. I would love to have reports with more fine-tuning or granularity, and more predefined reports."

"This service would be better if it had a separate license, only for this service, that could be used to track usage."

"They should continue integration with all other Microsoft security-related products. The integration with all the other products is still ongoing."

"I believe it's only set to be integrated with Microsoft Defender for identity and identity protection. I would like to see it available for use with something like Office 365 Defender. I don't think it's integrated with that yet."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps’s technical support services needs improvement."

"Sometimes, we'll get false positive alarms. For example, when a SharePoint path has no file sharing, but there is an external user, it will trigger an alarm that the file has been shared with an external user... the alerting mechanism should be more precise when giving you an alert about what activity has been done with the file..."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."

"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."

"The pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access have been very competitive compared to other platforms. I believe that if Cisco continues to improve costs or offers something similar to a Cisco credit, it would attract more customers."

"It is confusing. When you look at the prices, you have different licensing and years of licensing that you have to purchase. Additionally, it's unclear what service you get from those licenses regarding end-user support. We have a representative who has to walk me through it every time."

"For what you get, it's a fair price in comparison to other products."

"The product's pricing seems fair."

"The price could be better and should be reconsidered."

"The pricing is fair."

"It is a little bit expensive. When you want to have the complete package with Office 365, Defender, and everything else, it is expensive."

"Where we are right now, this is an acceptable pricing. I would like to see more transparency given to the end user. The end user given to us is via the cloud service provider. There are different programs and license models. Some include this, and some include that. It is all over the place. There can be a little more consistency or simplification in the pricing so that your parts list is not ten pages long, and you are not trying to determine, "If I have an E3, does this cover that?", or "Do I need to pay separately for the license?" Simplification would probably be better."

"I'm not totally involved in the pricing part, but I think its pricing is quite aggressive, and its price is quite similar to Netskope. Netskope has separate licensing fees or additional charges if you want to monitor certain SaaS services, whereas, with MCAS, you get 5,000 applications with their Office 365. It is all bundled, and there's no cost for using that. You only have the operational costs. In the country I am in, it is a bit difficult to get people with the required skill sets."

"We utilize the Microsoft E5 licensing, which encompasses the entire Microsoft suite; however, it is costly."

"It has fair pricing. You pay for what you get. As far as I know, there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fee."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	10

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	10
Large Enterprise	19

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Access?

Cisco Secure Access regularly requires patches that need to be installed. During downtime or after hours, patches nee...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?

I use Cisco Secure Access for Secure Access Service Edge (SASE), which provides me with secure identity-based access ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Secure Access?

Multi-organization might be a feature on Cisco Secure Access, but my clients are private companies that haven't merge...

See all answers

Which is the better security solution - Cisco Umbrella or Microsoft Cloud App Security?

Cisco Umbrella is an integral component of the Cisco SASE architecture. It integrates security in a single, cloud-nat...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Cloud App Security?

At the time of implementation, when the size of our organization was small, it was a more affordable product. Since a...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Microsoft Cloud App Security?

The fidelity of the signal in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has been a challenge in some areas. There have been i...

See all answers

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 13% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 39% of the time

FortiSASE vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 10% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 8% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 7% of the time

More Cisco Secure Access Competitors

Zscaler Internet Access vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 14% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 14% of the time

Netskope vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 10% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 7% of the time

Skyhigh Security vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 5% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

January 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access

January 2026

Download Cisco Secure Access product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

January 2026

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps report

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App Security

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Cisco Secure Access is a comprehensive Security Service Edge (SSE) solution (a key component of a SASE solution) that addresses the complexities of securing a hybrid enterprise. Cloud-delivered and grounded in zero trust, it delivers a unique blend of user simplicity and IT efficiency for frictionless, secure access to all applications—SaaS (with gen AI), private apps, and the internet—regardless of user location or device. Secure Access protects users, data, and devices against relentless, sophisticated, and constantly evolving threats including AI-driven attacks and identity breaches.

Provides all core SSE components (ZTNA, SWG, CASB, and FWaaS) plus extended capabilities.

Includes VPN-as-a-Service (VPNaaS), data loss prevention (DLP), AI Assistant, visibility/control/guardrails for generative AI use, digital experience monitoring (DEM), reserved IP, remote browser isolation (RBI), DNS-layer security, flexible security enforcement (in cloud or on-premises), policy verification, and more.
Protects users as they seamlessly access resources and apps with no extra steps needed, regardless of protocol, port, or level of customization
Simplifies IT operations through a single client, single dashboard, single license, and unified policies.
Lowers risk with least privilege, granular controls backed with unmatched threat intelligence of Cisco Talos.
Eases interoperability with other products from Cisco and third-party vendors with common administrative controls, data structures, and policy management.

Robust integrations

Integrates with Cisco Identity Intelligence to protect against the startling increase in identity-based attacks.
Integrates with many SAML Identity Providers (IDPs) such as AD, Azure AD, Okta, Ping, etc.
Integrates with Cisco offerings including SD-WAN, Splunk, XDR, Thousand Eyes, third party technologies such as Menlo RBI, Chrome Enterprise Browser, and AppOmni for SSPM.

Cisco

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is a comprehensive security solution that provides protection for cloud-based applications and services. It offers real-time threat detection and response, as well as advanced analytics and reporting capabilities. With Defender for Cloud Apps, organizations can ensure the security of their cloud environments and safeguard against cyber threats. Whether you're running SaaS applications, IaaS workloads, or PaaS services, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps can help you secure your cloud environment and protect your business from cyber threats.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Benefits:

Provides comprehensive security for cloud applications
Integrates with other Microsoft security tools
Easy to use and deploy
Provides real-time threat detection and response
Strong protection against phishing attacks and other common threats
Highly customizable to meet specific needs of different organizations

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Use Cases:

Governance, authentication, security, and compliance.
Detects shadow IT and anomalous user behavior
Controls access to applications
Provides auditing and filtering setups
Used for end-user compute devices, file monitoring, user investigation, and activity
Used for data governance, threat detection, and getting visibility over cloud applications
Used to identify information about applications beyond organizational boundaries
Prevent exfiltration and data filtration of corporate data
Used to deal with spam emails and detect shadow IT

Reviews from Real Users

Ram-Krish, Cloud Security & Governance at a financial services firm, says that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need".

PeerSpot user, Senior Cloud & Security Consultant at a tech services, writes that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps "Great for monitoring user activity and protecting data while integrating well with other applications".

Simon Burgess,Infrastructure Engineer at SBITSC, states that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is "A fluid, intelligent product for great visibility, centralized management, and increased uptime".

Microsoft

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.

1. IBM 2. Microsoft 3. Amazon 4. Google 5. Apple 6. Cisco Systems 7. Oracle 8. Intel 9. HP Inc. 10. Dell Technologies 11. Verizon Communications 12. AT&T 13. Comcast 14. T-Mobile 15. Sprint 16. Vodafone 17. Orange 18. BT Group 19. Deutsche Telekom 20. Telefonica 21. Nokia 22. Ericsson 23. Samsung Electronics 24. Sony 25. Panasonic 26. LG Electronics 27. Siemens 28. General Electric 29. Ford Motor Company 30. General Motors 31. Toyota Motor Corporation 32. Volkswagen Group

Customers for Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps include Accenture, St. Luke’s University Health Network, Ansell, and Nakilat.

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

December 2025

Free Report: Cisco Secure Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cisco Secure Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps report.

See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.