Forcepoint ONE vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comparison

Forcepoint and Microsoft are both solutions in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category. Forcepoint is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.4, while Microsoft is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.4. Forcepoint holds a 2.0% mindshare in CASB, compared to Microsoft’s 8.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Forcepoint 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 SummaryUpdated on Nov 7, 2024

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Forcepoint ONE are competing in the cloud security market. While Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is renowned for its seamless integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, providing robust compatibility and analytics, Forcepoint ONE holds an advantage with its comprehensive security features and intuitive use, making it a justifiable investment despite higher pricing.

Features: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers advanced threat detection, comprehensive analytics, and seamless integration with Microsoft 365. Forcepoint ONE focuses on data loss prevention, holistic threat protection across platforms, and an intuitive security model.

Room for Improvement: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps could enhance its cross-platform compatibility, reduce complexity in policy configuration, and improve user interface experience. Forcepoint ONE could benefit from a streamlined integration process, expanded customization for specific needs, and a reduction in resource consumption for smoother operation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is easily deployable within Microsoft environments, supported by robust customer service facilitating seamless transitions. Forcepoint ONE boasts a versatile deployment model suited for various infrastructures and offers dedicated customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a cost-effective solution for businesses already invested in Microsoft services, delivering strong ROI through ecosystem integration. Forcepoint ONE, while potentially more expensive initially, provides extensive security features that promise a worthwhile long-term investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,349 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 September 2025, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.2%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint ONE is 2.0%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 8.9%, down from 11.9% 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	8.9%
iboss	2.2%
Forcepoint ONE	2.0%
Other	86.9%

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford

Head of Cybersecurity at SES Water

It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless

One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured

Read full review

Edwin Eze-Osiago

Regional Solutions Manager Sub Saharan Africa at Infodata Professional Services Limited

Easy to deploy, stable, and scalable

Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement. Currently, the solution is not compatible with Azure AD for third-party authentication. The fraud proxy in the SmartEdge agent is not compatible with Forcepoint DLP or a web hybrid agent. I would like the developers to consolidate multiple agents across systems for better integration.

Read full review

Abdulrahman Muhammadi

information Security and IT Manager at Discover Dollar Technologies Pvt Ltd.

Integration with existing cloud workflows has simplified compliance and threat detection

Licensing cost is a significant concern. With Defender Plan 1, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comes with a pay-per-use model. Each feature has its own pricing when activated on VMs. For example, the vulnerability assessment has separate pricing, the base model including encryptions has separate pricing, and the compliance features have separate pricing. This applies to each VM and Azure resource individually. It is not straightforward where you can take one license and apply it to everything. Each feature has its own pricing model which can be tedious, as the costs keep accumulating. The only lacking feature currently is XDR (extended detection and response). Apart from that, I have only positive experiences with the whole Microsoft suite, except for the pricing structure.

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

"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."

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

"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."

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

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

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

More iboss pros

"The pricing is very good and cheaper than other solutions like Netskope and Forcepoint."

"The biggest thing that I like about this product is that it's easy to use and teach. When we have somebody new starting to work with the product, it's easy to teach them. It's also easy to use the product as it does so much."

"The control of web access by category is very effective."

"The most valuable feature was the website blocking capability, which allowed me to quickly block any dodgy websites."

"We are able to verify what is getting saved out onto the cloud. It allows us to have some DLP rules, since we have to be HIPAA compliant. If some personal health information has been uploaded to Office 365, then we are able to detect that sort of thing and account for it. We have set up rules to prevent people from doing that."

"The solution’s AJAX-VM provides constant reverse proxy uptime. It has been very positive for our security operations. When people are trying to access the SaaS solution, it protects us from downloading any of that data and experiencing any type of attacks"

"The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules."

"The core CASB solution is the most valuable part. It allows us to put policies in place around which devices can log into our cloud applications. We have a policy that states that only company devices can access these cloud applications."

More Forcepoint ONE pros

"The most valuable feature is the seamless integration across different clouds."

"The product helps us with privileged identity management to control who has access to what and for how long."

"Shadow IT discovery is the feature I like the most."

"The solution does not affect a user's workflow."

"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is to stop shadow IT."

"I like the web GUI/the management interface. I also like the security of Microsoft. As compared to other manufacturers, it's less complex and easy to understand and work with."

"The ability to sanction unsanctioned apps using Secure Score benchmarking, included in Cloud, is also beneficial."

"The most valuable feature is its policy implementation."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps pros

Cons

"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."

"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."

"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."

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

"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."

"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."

"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."

More iboss cons

"There is room for improvement in making the reporting closer to real-time, ideally around five or ten minutes instead of half an hour. The interface could also be updated as it was quite dated."

"The solution's integration with other products needs improvement."

"One area for improvement in Forcepoint ONE is that you'll need more training to install the solution yourself. I practiced in a laboratory and I needed more technical information to do the installation."

"I need control over access to web WhatsApp, which the solution cannot resolve yet."

"Integration into different multi-factor authentication tools. On their page, they tout Duo, but I don't use Duo. I use another vendor. Not that they don't interact, but it takes a little bit more doing. Any amount of efficiencies here would help."

"Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement."

"We encounter challenges in determining whether certain features for blocking certain file types or preventing automatic downloads are functioning correctly."

"I wish they would advance more into the endpoint DLP solution. Currently they do not do anything around endpoint, they're still strictly cloud-based. The forward proxy is really the only thing they do. What I would like to see them do is to scan machines, workstations and servers, for information we might not want on those machines. That would be huge."

More Forcepoint ONE cons

"There are challenges with detection and there are challenges with false-positive rates."

"There are some features, such as user navigation content filtering, that are disabled by default, and it probably makes sense to enable them by default."

"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."

"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."

"Licensing cost is a significant concern. With Defender Plan 1, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comes with a pay-per-use model."

"I would like for it to be available on Mac and for it to support all of the features of Microsoft financing products. It is really for Windows."

"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."

"The areas of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that need improvement are related to IAM, as they do not provide much support for local users."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

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

"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."

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

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

"When considering only the cost, the solution may appear to be costly; however, when evaluated in terms of commercial value, Bitglass is not expensive."

"There is training involved. If you're going to add more people to it, such as cross train more of your group, there's a cost. Other than that, that's it. We have paid exactly what the invoices have said. We signed a three-year contract and not gone above it."

"The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three."

"We have our pricing by user. We do our pricing agreements annually. There are also additional costs for maintenance."

"Typically, the longer you price forward, the better off you're going to be. They have been very willing to work with us on pricing."

"The licensing cost for Forcepoint ONE would depend on the features, but the pricing is very competitive here in Brazil. The solution offers a good price, and I would rate it a three or a four in terms of pricing. I don't have information on whether there are additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees for Forcepoint ONE."

"The E5 license offers everything bundled. People are moving to Microsoft because you buy one license and it gives you everything."

"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."

"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."

"This product is not expensive."

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

"It has pretty good pricing."

"The cost could be improved when you need to pay for anything. For example, refreshing files takes time to load, though it may be my Internet. To improve the refresh time, Microsoft says that we need to pay for a Premium license, and I don't like paying for things that help make a solution better."

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

867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

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	5
Large Enterprise	10

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	10
Large Enterprise	18

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 do you like most about Forcepoint ONE?

The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint ONE?

The licensing and pricing were fine with no issues. I took over from somebody else, and it stayed as it was until we ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Forcepoint ONE?

There is room for improvement in making the reporting closer to real-time, ideally around five or ten minutes instead...

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 do you like most about Microsoft Cloud App Security?

It does a great job of monitoring and maintaining a security baseline. For us, that is a key element. The notificatio...

See all answers

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

My impression on the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is that it's fair. I do...

See all answers

Comparisons

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 15% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 14% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 13% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 13% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Netskope vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 19% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 14% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 12% of the time

Forescout Platform vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 6% of the time

Skyhigh Security vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 6% of the time

More Forcepoint ONE Competitors

Zscaler Internet Access vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 19% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 15% of the time

Netskope vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 12% of the time

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

Compared 6% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 2% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

September 2025

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE

September 2025

Download Forcepoint ONE product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

August 2025

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps report

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

Bitglass

MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App Security

Overview

iboss offers a comprehensive security platform designed for diverse use cases such as web filtering, data loss protection, corporate proxy services, and URL filtering.

iboss integrates advanced features to address dynamic security needs, leveraging its strength in SASE, ZTNA, AI initiatives, and cloud integration, while ensuring seamless operations for remote work. It excels in historical forensics, malware protection, and flexible cloud deployments. Users benefit from comprehensive traffic scanning, robust malware detection, and PaaS capabilities that reduce hardware management. An intuitive admin console ensures efficient management with content filtering and low false positives. SSL decryption enhances security, while DLP protects data in AI conversations. Deployment is rapid and scalable, allowing effortless integration with emerging technologies.

What features does iboss offer?

Granular Web Filtering: Provides precise control over web content access.
Traffic Scanning: Monitors data through multiple ports for security breaches.
Malware Detection: Ensures superior protection against malware threats.
PaaS Capabilities: Eliminates need for hardware management.
SSL Decryption: Enhances data protection by decrypting secure connections.
DLP Capabilities: Safeguards data during AI interactions.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Scalability: Adapts quickly to growing demands and emerging tech integration.
Rapid Deployment: Reduces time to implement security measures.
User-Friendly Admin Console: Facilitates efficient operations management.
Low False Positives: Increases accuracy of threat detection systems.

iboss finds significant application in sectors such as education, where web filtering for K-12 is crucial, and in corporate environments requiring robust proxy services and URL filtering for network security. Its adaptability is essential in scenarios demanding flexible, decentralized security frameworks, particularly for remote work setups.

iboss

Forcepoint ONE is a comprehensive cybersecurity platform that provides organizations with a unified approach to protecting their critical data and assets. It offers a range of solutions that cover everything from network security and cloud security to data protection and insider threat prevention.

With Forcepoint ONE, organizations can gain complete visibility into their security posture, identify potential threats, and take proactive measures to mitigate risks.

One of the key features of Forcepoint ONE is its ability to provide real-time visibility into user behavior across all endpoints, networks, and cloud environments. This allows organizations to quickly identify and respond to potential threats, such as insider threats or malicious activity from external actors. Additionally, Forcepoint ONE offers advanced threat intelligence capabilities that leverage machine learning and AI to detect and respond to emerging threats. Another important aspect of Forcepoint ONE is its data protection capabilities.

The platform offers a range of solutions for protecting sensitive data, including data loss prevention (DLP), encryption, and secure web gateways. These solutions help organizations ensure that their critical data is protected both at rest and in transit, regardless of where it is stored or accessed.

Forcepoint ONE is a powerful cybersecurity platform that offers a comprehensive set of solutions for protecting organizations against a wide range of threats. With its advanced threat intelligence capabilities, real-time visibility into user behavior, and robust data protection features, Forcepoint ONE is an ideal choice for organizations looking to take a proactive approach to cybersecurity.

Forcepoint

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.

UNC-Charlotte

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

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

September 2025

Free Report: Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Forcepoint ONE 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.