Cisco Secure Web Appliance vs. Netskope CASB

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Secure Web Appliance
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Secure Web Appliance (formerly Cisco Web Security Appliance [WSA]), powered by Cisco Talos, protects by automatically blocking risky sites and testing unknown sites before allowing users to link to them, helping with compliance. It is available models S690, S390, and S190.N/A
Netskope CASB
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Netskope cloud access security broker (CASB) enables the user to identify and manage the use of cloud applications, regardless of whether they are managed or unmanaged, and prevents sensitive data from being exfiltrated from your environment by risky insiders or malicious cybercriminals who have breached your perimeter.N/A
Pricing
Cisco Secure Web ApplianceNetskope CASB
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Secure Web ApplianceNetskope CASB
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Secure Web ApplianceNetskope CASB
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Cisco Secure Web ApplianceNetskope CASB
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Check Point Quantum Security Gateway
Check Point Quantum Security Gateway
Score 8.9 out of 10
Avanan
Avanan
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
Skyhigh Secure Web Gateway
Skyhigh Secure Web Gateway
Score 9.3 out of 10
Avanan
Avanan
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Secure Web ApplianceNetskope CASB
Likelihood to Recommend
6.2
(9 ratings)
8.6
(3 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
6.4
(4 ratings)
7.0
(2 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Secure Web ApplianceNetskope CASB
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
We have both scenarios where we can describe that. For example, in the HQ, where we have about 3,000 users, Cisco IronPort Web Security Appliance is the ideal solution, because we can consolidate all the Internet access, policies, rules, etc. in the same box. However, if you have small offices with a few users, it's hard to justify one big and expensive box that could cost more than the whole office infrastructure.
Read full review
Netskope
Well suited for an organization that is either architecting their environment for majority SaaS usage, or presently is a cloud-first organization and wants greater insight into their existing cloud placements. It does provide good first-level DLP and will need to be supplemented with a purpose drive DLP control.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • SMA gave us central control over multiple servers, simplifying management.
  • Performance of the Appliance VM exceeded that of our old physical appliance-based solution.
  • Convenient licensing for virtualized environments that allows easy scaling.
Read full review
Netskope
  • Monitoring all traffic
  • Protecting your end user traffic
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • I think that the interface could need updates to adapt it to a much more current system, achieve quick access to necessary tools and adapt the platform to a much more customizable and comfortable system to work with.
  • It is undoubtedly a platform that is worth having, however, the license costs could be better adjusted to small businesses so that it can be accessed more easily.
  • It could be a bit complex to use, the use of codes is quite extensive, it could be adjusted to something much more practical but just as efficient.
Read full review
Netskope
  • Infrastructure resilience.
  • Growth and scale issues.
Read full review
Usability
Cisco
Because it's one of those products you almost don't realize it exists from the end user. From the administrator perspective, you can do everything on its web interface and it's very intuitive to manage, once you know the concepts behind identities, acls, etc. Also, once you build the control structure, I mean, you link 'local' groups with your own Active Directory groups, as we did here, you don't need to be managing those things on the appliance itself.
Read full review
Netskope
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Cisco
Our experience with Cisco's support was terrible. Other than the fact that they don't respond to service-related emails with urgency, they also keep on changing the policies that affected us. Recently, they came up with a new look for the same software, which was insanely slow. Renewal of keys for the old interface took months. Overall, the support was not very friendly from the users' point of view.
Read full review
Netskope
There have been some struggles with their infrastructure keeping pace with demand and load. Support can only do so much and has to defer to known problems being escalated.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
At home I have a McAfee service that does similar tasks and helps manage the users of my internet. McAfee seems more user friendly and easier to set exceptions.
Read full review
Netskope
We felt that Netskope provided a more holistic view in the CASB space from a user and usage perspective. In addition, the cost structure for Menlo was a bit higher and was a bit more complicated in the installation and maintenance perspectives
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • Security! Security! Security! We are financial company that work with very sensitive information. A lot of unsafe traffic was blocked on the Cisco IronPort WSA over years of using it. We did not earn on it but absolutely sure that we did not lose 'gazillion' of dollars being infected or scammed.
  • Easy to configure and use, no need to teach new personnel how work with this product (hopefully saving time = saving money).
  • Unfortunately the price of license subscription made financial managers push IT dept. to look for something cheaper.
Read full review
Netskope
  • We end up troubleshooting many not existing issues thanks to Netskope.
Read full review
ScreenShots