We compared Cisco Umbrella and Zscaler SASE across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Cisco Umbrella is highly regarded for its seamless integration with existing infrastructure, extensive range of security features, and ability to centrally manage security. Zscaler SASE is commended for its proxy and content filtering abilities, secure application access, and providing an all-in-one platform for various tasks.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Umbrella could enhance security by adding a transferring proxy feature and improving its Linux agent for Linux-based companies. Zscaler SASE needs improvements in configuration and management and better visibility in the DX layer. Some users have also reported performance and latency issues with Zscaler SASE.
Ease of Deployment: Based on the feedback, Cisco Umbrella has a simple and user-friendly initial setup that can be completed quickly in around 30 minutes. Zscaler SASE has a straightforward setup, but the deployment time can vary depending on specific use cases and complexity. Zscaler provides excellent support during the process and effectively resolves any issues that may arise.
Service and Support: Customers have praised Cisco Umbrella's support, describing it as excellent and superior to the customer service of other vendors. Zscaler SASE's support received varied feedback. Some customers were satisfied, but others faced delays and expressed frustration with having to repeatedly explain problems.
Pricing: The cost of Cisco Umbrella differs based on the specific needs and approach of the customer, with flexible pricing and transparent charges. It is seen as reasonable and competitive by some, but a few perceive it as costly. Zscaler SASE is seen as expensive, with some users questioning its value. The cost of a gateway per data center is particularly high, making it a costly implementation compared to alternatives.
ROI: Cisco Umbrella has proven to be a valuable investment by addressing maintenance concerns, reducing expenses associated with hardware updates, and effectively thwarting threats. It offers enhanced visibility and aids in remediation efforts. Zscaler SASE offers enhanced team visibility and a favorable return on investment when compared to Fortinet.
Comparison Results: Users appreciate Cisco Umbrella for its easy setup, extensive security features, and ability to centrally manage security. Zscaler SASE offers an all-in-one platform with advanced proxy and content filtering abilities. However, Zscaler needs enhancements in configuration and management. Cisco Umbrella could improve its Linux agent. Cisco Umbrella is considered to be reasonably priced, but Zscaler SASE is regarded as expensive.
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"We use Cisco Umbrella for DNS filtering and as a secure gateway."
"I like that it integrates with the infrastructure. I also like the kind of data and intelligence that's built-in. It helps create innovative reports for security."
"Using this solution has meant that we've needed to make fewer firewall changes."
"When it comes to hybrid work it's pretty effective. We've got the agents. We can protect people inside our building and, when they're using their laptops out in the field, they're still protected. It's working well."
"They have a wealth of articles in their knowledge base. This has given me the freedom to troubleshoot on my own time. "
"I like the original functionality, which allows for providing secure DNS services."
"Umbrella has helped my IT staff in two ways. First, our security team was able to get more insights into the users, their devices, and the sites they browse. Second, our system administration team was able to manage DNS resolutions in a way that is more accessible and less intrusive to our domain system."
"Cisco Umbrella is easy to monitor, manage, and deploy."
"Users get direct secure access to applications over the internet."
"It does the job. What it is needed for. I can use it for VPN, I can use it for secure connections, I can use it as a firewall. So the solution does the job."
"The scalability of the solution is great."
"The solution offers a simplified network infrastructure and security functions and it enables secure remote access for the users"
"With SASE, we have a single platform that covers multiple task services with which we need to control access. All the features are equally valuable."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to establish connectivity for remote users and remote endpoints. It offers a high level of granularity compared to typical VPNs, which also encapsulate a lot of I/O."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CASB solutions, which is protecting their Office 365."
"Sandboxing, DLP, and SSL inspection engine are the most valuable features of Zscaler SASE."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"Network connectivity was a bit of a challenge at the beginning, but we were able to get the right help from Cisco."
"Cisco Umbrella is difficult to manage and needs to include a dashboard. It needs to improve pricing as well."
"The API is very Cisco orientated, which is absolutely fine if you're using Cisco Firepower and SecureX kind of products, but if you want to integrate with third parties, it is a bit tricky. There are some key API connectors for the more prevalent SIEM tools. I would really like to see in Cisco Umbrella the ability to create customized reports and then assign the rights to view these reports to people within a group. I should be able to create a customized report, which is viewable by anybody who has the rights. I should be able to create groups within Cisco Umbrella, and then assign reports to groups and have those reports split out automatically only to those groups. I can kind of do it by restricting my email list, but it is a half-complete way of doing it."
"They can maybe simplify the configuration. For example, sometimes, the proxy part is quite difficult, and that's why we didn't deploy that."
"The firewall capabilities could be better. Cisco is starting to introduce some layer 7 capabilities now, but there's still some room to grow. They should continue with the development of Umbrella so that it is a full-blown cloud-managed firewall solution."
"I would like to see Cisco enable us to get objects from the internet. I would also like to be able to choose groups."
"There are a couple of different pieces that have different portals. I know they're working on getting them all into one portal, but that's probably the biggest thing that needs improvement right now. It's not a single pane of glass yet."
"They need to improve analytics so they report on more of the specifics of user activity."
"It has a limitation, if you are creating a rule or something for a web application or something, you could only add five users, not more than that. Five or four users are only included in a rule. If you want to create a rule for more than five or four users, you have to go through other methods, not particularly with the application. Working within the application with this method would be quite easy as compared to listing a URL or a normal IP address."
"We often face performance and latency issues with Zscaler SASE."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
"It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best."
"The interface needs a bit of work."
"The area that requires improvement is their support. The current support is lacking."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration."
"The DX layer could be better if it had improved visibility."
Cisco Umbrella is ranked 2nd in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 55 reviews while Zscaler SASE is ranked 7th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 10 reviews. Cisco Umbrella is rated 8.8, while Zscaler SASE is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Umbrella writes "We can see all of our locations in one place and only have to make changes once for all our locations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler SASE writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". Cisco Umbrella is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Palo Alto Networks DNS Security and TitanHQ WebTitan, whereas Zscaler SASE is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, VMware SD-WAN, Netskope and FortiSASE . See our Cisco Umbrella vs. Zscaler SASE report.
See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.