Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs Menlo Secure comparison

Kaspersky and Menlo Security are both solutions in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category. Kaspersky is ranked #23 with an average rating of 8.3, while Menlo Security is ranked #26. Kaspersky holds a 0.4% mindshare in WSG, compared to Menlo Security’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Kaspersky users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Menlo Security users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

Menlo Secure and Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway compete in internet gateway protection. Menlo Secure is more cost-effective and offers superior customer service, while Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is recognized for its extensive security features.

Features: Menlo Secure provides cloud-based seamless integration, advanced threat detection, and a user-friendly interface. Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway offers robust anti-malware capabilities, a comprehensive threat intelligence network, and child protection features.

Room for Improvement: Menlo Secure may improve in logging transparency, handling site bypass authentications, and SSL decryption processes. Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway could enhance integration capabilities, reduce initial deployment time, and offer more detailed real-time analytics.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Menlo Secure is noted for straightforward cloud deployment and rapid customer service, with easy troubleshooting. Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway provides a solid deployment framework and benefits from comprehensive documentation and an established support network.

Pricing and ROI: Menlo Secure is considered budget-friendly due to low setup costs and favorable ROI through efficient threat prevention. Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway may involve higher upfront costs but offers value with its extensive protective features.

To learn more, read our detailed Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Menlo Secure Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Menlo Secure

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 Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.4%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is 0.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 1.7%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
iboss	2.4%
Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway	0.4%
Menlo Secure	1.7%
Other	95.5%

Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

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

reviewer2736225

Program Manager at a hospitality company with 51-200 employees

Effective threat protection with room for cost and usability improvements

There are some drawbacks that I would mention. To be frank, enterprises always look for cost benefits, so Kaspersky could implement some price benefits. Additionally, regarding know-how, if I am an experienced person it's fine, but when someone novice is working with it, they need information about why certain actions are required. Security is a field that is very vast, and implications are not known to everyone. In future updates, a quick walk-through and know-how features would be beneficial, such as information text at relevant places. This will increase usability. Feature-wise, an impact analysis would be a really good addition.

Read full review

reviewer2701794

Head Of Bluechip Enterprise at a manufacturing company with 51-200 employees

Provides strong protection and multiple use cases but struggles with market recognition

There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto. Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco. What can be improved is market awareness and adoption of the technology. When selling it in the channel, regardless of how good the technology might be, success depends more on market adoption and awareness.

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

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

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

"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"

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

"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."

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

"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."

"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."

More iboss pros

"I would recommend it to others as it's easy to use."

"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is the antivirus."

"The password thing is very good, and the overall URL protection."

"The most valuable aspect for me is the user-friendly interface."

"When it comes to threat detection, it is very strict with file downloads and uploads. It sends reports and quarantines suspicious files."

"Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway has positively impacted our organization by helping us control unwanted attacks and limiting our exposure to risks."

"The most valuable features of the solution are the antivirus and child protection features."

"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."

"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."

"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."

"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."

"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."

Cons

"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."

"The dashboards for local use could be better."

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

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

"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."

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

"Its pricing could be better."

"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."

More iboss cons

"It might be helpful to have notifications on mobile devices, especially if the same browser profile is used on both mobile and laptop."

"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing."

"I believe the absence of a procedure is the main issue."

"In different locations, they're priced differently, but that's mainly marketing rather than the product features."

"The initial setup of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is complex. The full deployment took approximately two weeks."

"When I do a configuration, I do not know what implication it will have downstream."

"The customer support of the product is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required."

"Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco."

"The user monitoring could still be improved."

"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."

"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."

"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

"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 cost is relatively high, and as a licensed product, there are restrictions on the number of users permitted per license."

"It is expensive."

"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being very expensive and one being cheap. It's neither too cheap nor too expensive."

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."

"Personal computer licenses can be expensive if you were to scale the solution extensively. However, large companies will most likely use Endpoint solutions and not this one."

"I am okay with the pricing."

"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."

"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."

"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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

14%

Retailer

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

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	6
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

No data available

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 Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?

Regarding pricing, I'll be exactly on the brink, neither for it nor against it because being a small company, it's a ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?

We work with a cloud solution. The product that we use is developed as a SaaS model. In this case, we work with AWS a...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?

That's a very generic feedback. I would not have much information about threat intelligence metrics through Kaspersky...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto....

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

People are mainly using it for zero trust web access. Menlo Secure is built from the ground up to provide zero basic ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

Secure file sharing and data protection is not exactly what Menlo Secure is designed to do. While it can handle some ...

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

AhnLab V3 Internet Security vs Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway

Compared 46% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway

Compared 20% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway

Compared 19% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway

Compared 15% of the time

More Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway Competitors

Prisma Access Browser vs Menlo Secure

Compared 32% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Menlo Secure

Compared 11% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs Menlo Secure

Compared 10% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Menlo Secure

Compared 9% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs Menlo Secure

Compared 6% of the time

More Menlo Secure Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

January 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway

January 2026

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway report

Download Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway product report

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure

January 2026

Download Menlo Secure product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web 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

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is a comprehensive security solution designed to protect businesses from a wide range of cyber threats. It provides advanced protection against malware, phishing, spam, and other types of cyber attacks, ensuring that businesses can operate safely and securely online. The solution is easy to deploy and manage, with a user-friendly interface that allows administrators to configure and monitor security policies from a central location. It also includes advanced reporting and analytics tools, enabling businesses to gain insights into their security posture and identify potential vulnerabilities. Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway uses a range of advanced technologies to provide comprehensive protection against cyber threats. These include signature-based detection, behavioral analysis, and machine learning algorithms, which work together to identify and block malicious activity in real-time. The solution also includes advanced anti-spam and anti-phishing capabilities, which help to prevent employees from falling victim to email-based attacks. It can also be configured to block access to malicious websites and prevent the download of potentially harmful files.

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is a powerful and effective security solution that provides businesses with the protection they need to operate safely and securely online. With its advanced features and easy-to-use interface, it is an ideal choice for businesses of all sizes looking to enhance their cyber security posture.

Kaspersky

Menlo Security Secure Application Access

Menlo Security Secure Application Access makes zero trust access easy, giving users secure connectivity to private applications, including web and legacy applications. At the core of Secure Application Access is the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser, which fetches, secures and delivers the content for users.

In addition to providing simple-to-deploy, clientless ZTA, Secure Application Access and the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser protect applications from attacks such as session hijacking, cookie manipulation, and other tactics that employ protocol manipulation.

Secure Application Access protects applications from Internet threats and provides granular controls for added protection of the application and associated data. These security controls include Read-only/Read-write, Upload/download, Copy/paste, AV scanning, Sandboxing, and Data Loss Prevention.

Last Mile Data Protection

Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection identifies and prevents sensitive data from leaving your company by meticulously inspecting all file uploads and user input across browsing sessions. Leveraging the Secure Cloud Browser, users are protected from the internet and you can protect your organization from data loss with comprehensive traffic monitoring and controls. This approach addresses the growing concerns surrounding data leakage in the age of AI tools like ChatGPT.

By identifying sensitive data through file types, regular expressions, or predefined libraries, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection empowers security teams to regulate data input into AI platforms and prevent unauthorized uploads. This capability provides crucial protection for intellectual property, PII, and other confidential information.

The solution leverages the Menlo Cloud Security Platform's visibility and control over traffic to reliably detect and prevent data leaks originating from both browser submission forms and non-browser traffic. With the ability to inspect encrypted web traffic, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection enforces DLP policies consistently across all users and devices, ensuring comprehensive data protection.

Menlo Security

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.

Tael, Insolar, Goods.ru, Republic of Serbia

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Menlo Secure

December 2025

Free Report: Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Menlo Secure

Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Menlo Secure and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Menlo Secure report.

See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.

We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.