No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Kaspersky Security for Inte...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
29th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (27th), Anti-Malware Tools (35th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (10th)
Microsoft Defender for Clou...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is 0.1%. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 2.0%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps2.0%
Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway0.1%
Other97.9%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2736225 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
FV
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and operation efficiency."
"The most valuable aspect for me is the user-friendly interface."
"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."
"The password thing is very good, and the overall URL protection."
"When it comes to threat detection, it is very strict with file downloads and uploads. It sends reports and quarantines suspicious files."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is the antivirus."
"The scalability of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is very good."
"The benefit you get is that you are able to monitor all your applications and control the data that goes out of those applications."
"Overall, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is very convenient for investigation, in terms of security breaches, or if there is file exfiltration."
"The solution is helping a lot; we get very detailed reporting on security that really shows what users are doing, including what they've opened, what they're sharing, downloading, viewing, and when they are logging in."
"Better logging allows us to find problems and take appropriate steps to lock them out."
"The compliance capabilities of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps are quite extensive."
"Microsoft Defender is probably now accepted as the best product on the market for antivirus and web filtering."
"It is very easy to use, which is what we look for in these types of solutions."
"After creating the policy you can be assured that a user's data is being protected."
 

Cons

"It might be helpful to have notifications on mobile devices, especially if the same browser profile is used on both mobile and laptop."
"The initial setup of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is complex. The full deployment took approximately two weeks."
"In different locations, they're priced differently, but that's mainly marketing rather than the product features."
"I believe the absence of a procedure is the main issue."
"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing."
"The customer support of the product is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required."
"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."
"Licensing cost is a significant concern. With Defender Plan 1, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comes with a pay-per-use model."
"The insights could be improved, especially in reporting."
"The integration with macOS operating systems needs to be better."
"I want them to enhance in-session policy."
"There are certain areas where the product could improve, such as some functionalities that did not work as expected."
"If this solution were more robust then it would be much more useful."
"We are having trouble with our continuous reporting configuration and struggling with configuring the collector properly with our log parsing. We've also faced difficulties getting support for this issue. It's taken us months to figure this out after going through a couple of different support channels."
"Sometimes the support is actually lacking."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is expensive."
"The cost is relatively high, and as a licensed product, there are restrictions on the number of users permitted per license."
"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 am okay with the pricing."
"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."
"We are an MST and we do not pay for the solution. However, the price of the solution could be better."
"It is a little bit expensive. When you want to have the complete package with Office 365, Defender, and everything else, it is expensive."
"The E5 license offers everything bundled. People are moving to Microsoft because you buy one license and it gives you everything."
"The pricing is fair."
"We have an educational licensing agreement. It's a customer agreement for multiple years."
"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."
"We utilize the Microsoft E5 licensing, which encompasses the entire Microsoft suite; however, it is costly."
"Our clients normally use the Microsoft E1 licensing, which is renewed yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Computer Software Company
16%
Pharma/Biotech Company
11%
University
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

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 slightly pricey solution. However, considering the advantages they bring, we are...
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 as our cloud provider. We use a public cloud. The tool is good, but they need to ...
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 Security for Internet Gateway because I've not been monitoring it for quite som...
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-native solution, unifying multiple features like DNS-layer security, threat intelli...
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 all our productivity applications were on O365, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps...
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 instances where the alerts generated have been false positives. A lot of work has...
 

Also Known As

No data available
MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tael, Insolar, Goods.ru, Republic of Serbia
Customers for Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps include Accenture, St. Luke’s University Health Network, Ansell, and Nakilat.
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.