Cisco Umbrella Reviews

In my previous company, there was a gap in being able to put controls on users when they were away from the network. We thought, "Okay, Umbrella can do this for us," and it was at a reasonable cost for our security budget.

With Umbrella, it didn't matter if the users were in the office or they were going to go out. When I trained them I said, "If you go to Target, Starbucks, or anywhere else you can get on a hotspot, you're going to be covered with our rules, so we can make sure you're protected and that our company device is protected."

It gave our users, from all of our sites, something like a first line of defense, including monitoring all the exit points of our offices. We also used Cisco AnyConnect on everybody's laptop so that any time they were out, we were making sure to secure their machine and keep an eye on it.

Having a single pane of glass allowed us to quickly monitor and find out what was happening at that moment. We could see active connections going to a public address on the internet. At one point there were so many of them, thousands and thousands to one public address, which was more than normal. I had to contact Cisco support, and say, "This is what I'm seeing. Something's not right," and they said, "You're right." In the main screen, we switched over to investigation and we found that it was a bad actor. The bad actor was checking for domains that are flying around, and he found a few of ours that weren't paid for. He bought them and then he started controlling where they were going by redirecting them. That raised a big red flag for our company. They never had any idea that that had been going on for a very long time.

There were other bad actors who had some of our domain names as well. I had to work with legal and we actually purchased back a few domain names from people. As a result, we taught our guys internally, "When you do a domain and you're going to do tests in the lab, make sure that we put purchase orders in. It's so cheap, let's buy them so that we have control of them, and not allow this again." That was a big awakening.

Another benefit of Cisco Umbrella was related to our wireless. If we had a vendor come to our company, I'd have to get permission for him to use our wireless. I'd have to put in a ticket with his machine name, the IP he would have, and ask for a two-hour window. But I could tell that vendor, "In the same way that you are helping us with the product we purchased from your company, we're going to help protect you at no charge. When you get on our wireless, we're going to have it set up so that everything you do is monitored, just like everybody else here in the company. Even though you don't work for our company, you'll be protected and that will help protect us." They would stare at me, and I'd say, "I know a lot of companies don't do that, but we're doing that because we want to make sure you have a good experience and that we have a good experience by staying safe."

I was able to make use of Cisco Umbrella because it acts like a proxy. The company also had content security, which I used on-prem with Blue Coat products. Any time someone went off the network, the AnyConnect client had the Umbrella agent built in, and it would realize when their computer connected that they were not on the corporate network. It would monitor and they would have pretty close to the same rules that they had to follow when they were in the office, regarding what kind of website browsing they could do.

The single pane of glass management was one of the really good features. From that single pane, not only could you look at what was happening security-wise, such as what was being blocked by domains and IPs, but you could check for your roaming users. With a deployment of AnyConnect, or just the Umbrella agent, on 5,000 machines, you could watch the main glass and see how many roaming users were out there that had it on their machines. And even if they were in the office, it was always active, talking to Cisco's cloud.

You could see numbers. I was able to watch, as we were deploying, how many people were getting the agent. I could see activity such as how many blocks we were getting, what types of blocks they were, and whether they were in categories. I would ask why those users were going to those categories that they shouldn't be going to. Maybe we needed to just refresh them with an email saying, "Hey, remember, we don't do this kind of thing."

Cisco's Umbrella client product is superb. It worked so well for us and was easy to deploy.

The design of the screens could be improved. Sometimes you're trying to look for information, for what you think is critical that should be on that first screen of the dashboard so that you can quickly take screenshots to have people help out, but you have to hop between screens to find little pieces of evidence.

They should work with their customers to find out, when they're troubleshooting, if they're going through multiple screens just to get little pieces of information. Maybe they could design an overall security screen for an event and pull that stuff in so that it's on one screen, rather than having to go search for it. Right now, you're always going back and looking on the left-hand side, going down the column, and trying to remember where something you need is. You have to click all over the place to go find what you're looking for.

I used it at my previous company for about four years.

It was always up. We never had any problems. It was always there.

Scaling was very simple. Since we were using a VPN, we had Cisco AnyConnect on all the user machines, with Umbrella built into it, and that deployment was just blasted out and it was seamless.

The Cisco Umbrella support group was wonderful; very strong. I loved it. I never had one issue with them. They were willing to be there with us, and walk us through things every bit of the way.

We didn't have a whole lot going on in terms of security and when I got a new manager, he asked, "How do we protect the people when they're out in a store?" That's when we saw that's where the flaw was. We were protecting everything on-prem but the gap we found was that when users were traveling around, we were not seeing where they were going. We were holding them to a standard internally, but when they were outside they were doing whatever they wanted.

What a simple product. It's a fast deployment. Then, you can start designing how you want to do your policies and what you're going to block. But once we told them what public addressing they were going to see, within a few hours we would see them go green. We said, "It's already seeing the data. Let's start applying policies, and we can start controlling all this."

We looked at metrics. As I mentioned, one of the benefits we received was finding the bad actors who had collected our domains that weren't paid for. That helped us to put the magnifying glass to use and say, "Hey, we have something going on." 

I also worked with an outside company that Cisco purchased. I sent them our data from Umbrella and they actually mapped out our data and found bots on our network. There weren't many, but there were a few. The guy shared that with me on the screen and said, "If you buy the service to have us be part of your Cisco deployment, we'll take your data, continually analyze it, and give you reports." 

There was one bot in particular that was just sitting there. The guy at the other company said, "That bot that you're seeing, it's asleep. Look again in a few hours," and it popped up. He said, "It just woke up at that point to try to do a command call." He said, "But we're blocking them, so you're not getting any threats." We didn't know that we had bots in there, and that was a big benefit.

I also had to run numbers for reports. One of them looked at our category-blocking on Umbrella, such as blocks of alcohol sites, social media, weapons, government. I would provide monthly reports to show how many blocks we had from our users trying to go to these types of categories, and it really woke up management: "Wow. That thing is blocking." 

Our investment in this worked, and we were showing it by numbers. It wasn't only that we found bots and bad actors, but we were also controlling things  by blocking phishing and categories. It was protecting us and no one was able to get past those blocks.

The pricing was marvelous. We only had to pay for licenses and they worked a very nice deal with us. It was a much better way to go because it was within budget. It was an easy cost for us to handle.

We did not evaluate any other options. We invited Cisco to come in and do a demonstration, and it was so strong. I also come from a Cisco background of many years. In addition, the industry reviews rated them very well and we took that as our lead.

When they came in and showed us what they could do and how easy it was to monitor every one of our sites within a day, after we put in our external public addresses, it was a no-brainer. It was up and live by the next day, after just a few hours. It was easy to use and set up and we could use it like our internal proxies. We could manage the content and know what was going on and investigate things. We knew what sites people were going to. It was wonderful. Everything we needed was there. We didn't have to go any further, and we knew Cisco would have our back.

All the users understood why we were putting the security control in place, to show that not only were they going to be protected at work on company-owned devices, but whenever they would go outside, we were also going to help. We had to mitigate the chances that they would get something on their machines and make sure that we stopped anything that shouldn't come in and affect our network or expose us to anything.

With Cisco Umbrella, employee morale was very high. We hardly had any complaints at all. One of the reasons is that, when doing regular security troubleshooting, we would go to Umbrella as our first line investigation. We might find a domain or IP that was being blocked by Cisco, something they consider a risk. We would check it out and if it didn't look to be bad we could bypass the block and allow that AD group or set of users to go to that site, because they had to do business as usual. With that ability, we had very few problems, if at all. Overall, it was smooth, with everybody happy, including management. They were happy that we had our first line of defense and that it worked out very well.

I introduce Umbrella to any company that I'm involved with. Cisco is already taking the correct steps right now, as a CASB for any cloud activity as well as DLP. Once they circled around to help companies with protection when they move to the cloud, that was the right direction. I'm not using Umbrella every day anymore, but I'm a proponent of it as a first defense for your company at a reasonable cost. And you don't have hardware to manage. You just rely on Cisco, get your support contract, and work with them to have them help fix things.

I'm a firm believer in Cisco Umbrella and I would definitely use it everywhere I go. I'm speaking to companies in the health industry and telling them, "Guys, you can't just have four people working on security and think you're going to do everything in the world to protect your hospital. You're going to end up on the news." I try to introduce them to this type of solution, to at least have something there to mitigate and help out.

We use Umbrella to monitor user activity and make sure that our staff isn't clicking on malicious links. We also use it to protect us by being more proactive on links that are already known to cause harm or potential hacks. Overall, it's keeping everything in a safe box.

We had a lot of challenges with staff clicking on ad links, random Google search links. Most staff want to shop during the day or in their downtime and were clicking on random links and then causing potential network issues, bugs, and causing network downs. Umbrella has helped us limit that.

It has provided our organization with more stability. Even though staff would like to shop using certain links, it gives us the option to educate them: "Hey, some of these links, just don't click on those." We are pretty lenient. We understand people want to shop and do other things at work. We try to keep it work-related, but safe.

Everyone really just wants to be able to click and do what they do, just like at home. But for the IT side of it, it does benefit us by limiting all of the extra activity. It does give us some comfortability that we aren't going to wake up, or even come in in the afternoon, and the whole network is down because someone went to buy some shoes or they clicked on a malicious email and caused a chain reaction.

It's very important for our organization to support the hybrid workers because we're a health clinic. A lot of staff are going to be away, but with the COVID numbers still out there, we want to be able to provide the same support that we did before COVID. We want to give the same flexibility, the same availability to our patients, that we had in the past. Being remote or having hybrid, it does give us a different range of opportunities to implement different workflows. They can reach out with more telecommunication, more video conferencing, rather than having a patient drive out to a site to seek support. We can do remote assistance and, with Umbrella, it still gives us the opportunity to be secure through those communication links.

We don't really have metrics at this particular time for it, but just [anecdotally] from past troubleshooting, having to diagnose maybe five different areas, this saves us a lot of time and a lot of effort in isolating the actual issue. We can just open up Umbrella, go to the specific area that we feel is impacted, or just look at one of the key dashboards that are on the portal and identify the issue.

It's very easy to maintain network connectivity with Umbrella. Before, we were having a lot of issues, but since Umbrella has been implemented, we really haven't had to touch it. It's kind of self-sufficient.

The solution is a lot more proactive. It does have its own features where it constantly uploads known threats and blocks those. It takes a lot of the guesswork out of our environment, but it also gives us an opportunity, if there are some questionable links, to diagnose those without it impacting the environment.

The best feature is the visibility. We're able to see the specific user names of whoever clicked on a certain link. It also gives us a threat detection level. It allows us to maintain more [awareness of] who's doing what they shouldn't be doing. The most valuable asset of it is giving us the ability to categorize who should have access to what type of sites.

This solution does give us a single-pane-of-glass for this particular instance. We do have several products implemented that we manage, which this hasn't integrated with yet, but we have just been made aware of the SecureX implementation and we are looking into implementing that and bringing that into another single-pane-of-glass, but with more options available.

A single pane of glass saves time. It saves effort and the headache of having to open up multiple links and go to different dashboards for troubleshooting different areas. This does have a lot of options available for us to see who's doing what, what trends, what errors. We can set up our alerting through it as well. It is definitely a great dashboard.

The dashboard, the single pane, is very helpful, it's very visual. Everything is straightforward there; it's definitely important for management. Even when we bring it to upper management and explain why this product is beneficial for us, this gives us a good breakdown and makes a lot of details available for us.

So far, I haven't seen any areas that need improvement. As far as what we need it to do, it's doing just that. It's comfortable for us. It's working beyond our expectations. Something on our end that might make it better is alerting going to our ticketing system. It's not something that we have discussed, but that would be a proactive option for us to provide a learning experience for the staff.

We've had Umbrella implemented for about two years.

The stability is very great. Once it's deployed and you do your due diligence to make sure that everything is communicating and in sync, we've hardly had to touch it.

For our environment, it doesn't seem to have any issues with the amount of users and staff. We have been constantly growing since we deployed it without any impact. No negative impact is forecasted.

The support has been really good. I have only had to utilize support about three times. It's been more of a training area: "How do I get to this area?" and "What does this actually do? How can this benefit me?" From there, it still has been stable and smooth and doing everything that we expected it to do.

Positive

We had a different overall firewall solution, which was a Sophos firewall. But since we migrated away from that, we implemented the Firepower firewall and, in addition to that, added in Umbrella.

The reliability wasn't really there, with Sophos always having issues, even from the endpoint perspective. We had issues across the board and it was management's decision to look into a new solution.

We just did one deployment through a virtual machine and that manages all of our routers and all of our users. We haven't had to do multi-site configurations or deployments. It goes towards the organization, uploads all of our users, and all of our statistics, and maintains things from there.

I'm not sure of the actual cost that went into it, but it's definitely a productive product for us.

The solution doesn't require almost any maintenance, unless you're doing triple checks, upgrades, or just being proactive in different areas. But for the most part, once it's deployed, you just give it about a week or two to check your levels and make sure everything is the way that you intend the product to work.

As far as the IT infrastructure team goes, we're all happy with the product. It definitely takes a lot of load off of our plate. We don't have to deal with certain sites being blocked. We have been able to set expectations, where these particular users have access to these types of sites, and certain sites are just blocked. That's just the company standard. From the staff perspective, they want to be able to browse freely, but we were able to set those expectations and guidelines and that we're working in the best interests of the site.

I'll rate it a 10 out of 10. It's been functioning very efficiently and effectively, and it's doing everything we need it to do. It takes a lot of load off of our team.

We use Cisco Umbrella to secure our gateway. All of the DNS forwarding coming out of the company from any site or all the DNS requests are forwarded through Cisco Umbrella, and then they determine if that is a safe address and if the content coming back is safe. They will either reject the addressing out of hand, or they'll look at the Layer 7 content and reject that from making it back to us.

We are using the Secure Internet Gateway (SIG) Advantage package. In terms of deployment, effectively, it's deployed from our private cloud. It's in our data closet on our servers.

It enables us to finally allow laptops to be used as workstations and allow data to leave the building. In the past, laptops were only used for VPN access, but they would connect back to their data inside the company. This has allowed us to have a level of confidence that they're protected as if they were behind our firewall. So, now, we've got work-from-home people who literally have their workstations with them.

We have six sites with 60 to 70 users. The baseline configuration allows for additional protection for any DNS requests as they leave those sites, and then the secondary policy is for the mobile devices as they leave the premises. When they're connected to public WiFi, they have an additional policy that kicks in for that time that they're not connected back to the company. So, when they're on public WiFi without a VPN, the tool will actually put that second policy in place that's more aggressive and offers a higher level of protection when it's not sitting behind the firewall. All that is automated. It's all built into the agent.

We don't allow WiFi inside of our network for connection to our actual business network. As soon as a device is docked, it disables WiFi on that mobile device.

When we have laptops that leave the building, they could connect to public WiFi before they establish a VPN connection back into the company. For that duration or that period of time when they're not docked in the network or on a VPN, they effectively don't have that full layer of security that I provide inside the building. This tool stands in during that period of time, and we extend the security settings through their basic firewall or their cloud-based firewall at that time. So, we do content filtering and control access, but they also are looking at new domains, IP addresses, and bad requests. They're blocking them on my behalf when a laptop is not sitting behind our security appliances.

There are a couple of interface issues. I know that they say that there are feature enhancements that are noted. For example, we've got the Cisco Meraki security appliances, and there, we geofence our company to where we're allowed to send and receive traffic. So, in our case, by default, we only allow traffic to six different countries, which allows us to effectively prevent traffic for the majority of bad players in the world, but they don't give you an easy way to do that in Cisco Umbrella. With Cisco Meraki, I can specify or pick the countries. I can say that I want to only allow traffic from these six countries, and I'm done. With Cisco Umbrella, I have to rely on the fact that they're going to prevent traffic to other countries. They're going to decide if it's good or bad. I can't geofence out. I can plot top-level domains, but .com and .net go global. I can certainly block a China (CN) or a Russia (RU) domain, but that doesn't give me the same level of granularity. 

Apparently, Cisco Umbrella has got that as a feature request to allow an administrator to say, "I specifically only want traffic to and from these countries. Everything else should be dumped." That way, when they're sitting behind my network or they go out in the wild, they have that same level of traffic being blocked.

I have been using it for 14 to 15 years.

We've had no issues. It has done exactly what it's supposed to do.

It is cloud-based. So, scalability should not be an issue. 

Any increase in its usage is all relative to the growth of our staff. Currently, we deploy the laptops for people who need to work from home or are traveling between the banks. That's roughly about 20% of our total staff. Some people aren't going to be working from home, and some of their jobs can't be done from home. They have no need for mobile devices. If there is a need to work from home, its usage will increase. It is there if we need it to scale, but at this point, it is not scheduled to change.

Once I became a paying customer, it was much better. The preliminary training is there, but when you get into the nuances and the details of some of its capabilities, you need to talk to tech support. Once you're a paid customer, you get direct access, and then it's good. When I'm able to get a hold of them, their technical support is a 10 out of 10.

Positive

I didn't use any similar solution previously. 

I was a hundred percent involved in its deployment. We had a couple of issues. The proof of concept was done without a lot of planning. So, there were some mistakes made along the way. If I was doing it again the second time, I wouldn't make the same mistakes. 

The default configurations have your baselines. Those are never supposed to get changed, and I changed and tweaked those for our proof of concept. After a couple of weeks, I had some additional guidance from the Cisco Umbrella team. You leave the baseline configuration, and then you clone and create a new configuration that sits in front of it. So, everyone gets the baseline, and you don't change that. If you want to change it, you make a new policy and then make the changes to that. If you change the baseline default policy and you make a mistake in it, you've to back that all out. If you make it in the new policy, in the worst case, you just delete it, and automatically everyone goes back to baseline. So, there's still a policy in effect. That was a training issue that should have been resolved. Now that I've done it, if somebody asks me, I would say that this is the way you've got to do it.

It was just me taking care of its deployment. In terms of maintenance, once it's configured, unless you're retweaking and adding or removing something that was blocked, it pretty much runs itself.

I have less maintenance to resolve, fix, and reconfigure VPN clients personally, and the feedback from the end-users is that they're more productive.

We were using the free version, and we implemented the paid version about two months ago.

I'm paying a fair price, but everything is negotiable with Cisco. One of the benefits that I got by having Cisco Umbrella is the licensing of the Cisco AnyConnect VPN client. There has always been an issue for years and years with Cisco Meraki in terms of VPN clients and using the native built-in Windows client. It keeps reconfiguring itself. By using Cisco AnyConnect as the VPN client, it's not affected by Windows patching or people typing in passwords by mistake. It's more resilient and doesn't change. With just Meraki solution, there was an extra expense for the Cisco AnyConnect VPN client. By having Cisco Umbrella, that licensing is now included.

There were a couple of other options, and I discussed them with another consultant. As a regulated industry, we have to do vendor management, and vendors have to be vetted. So, Cisco was already a vetted vendor. There are other companies that do the same thing, but Cisco didn't require me to do any more vetting. They were already a vendor.

When it's configured the way it's supposed to work, it turns itself on and off based on the status of the VPN or the dock condition. Once it's configured, it does exactly what it's supposed to do. 

If you're doing a proof of concept on it, fully understand how the policies are configured and what the flow is. You should understand the hierarchical status of the policies to configure it right the first time. You don't really want to guess it.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

I'm doing business for customers. I'm building customer networks. We have Cisco Umbrella and Cisco Secure Endpoint, and the use case is that we connect to the company network from all over the place, and we need to do it in a secure way. 

We are just a small company with about 300 employees. Everybody is using these products to securely connect to the corporate network. From there, we support our customers. It needs to be really secure so that no security problems spread from our network to the customers' network. This is something we absolutely need to avoid. That's why these products are really good for us.

For me, it's quite good for daily work. Mainly, I work from a home office, so I have it running all day. It's okay for me. There is not much noise about it. I don't need to pay a lot of attention to this. It's just running in the background, and that's what I need.

It enables mobile work from anywhere. If you are at home, at a customer, or traveling, it enables a secure way of accessing the corporate network.

As a user, everything is there for securing our infrastructure from end to end to detect and remediate threats. There's nothing else that I need.

It saves time for sure. It doesn't require much attention. Everybody can use it. The end-users don't need to have any special skills. It's just perfect. I don't have the metrics on time savings because it isn't easy to know how much time you would have spent if you had an unstable product or if you had to take care of all this. 

For me, it's important that I get a connection to my corporate network in a secure and fast way. This product just runs in the background and doesn't need any attention. For me, as a user, it's perfect. 

Overall, I'm quite happy with Cisco products, but there could be one place where you can check what's going on. There could be one place where you get all the information about these products so that you don't need to look around. You get the status, information about what lately happened, and if there was anything on the machine in one single place.

We've been using Cisco Umbrella for about a year and a half, and we've been using Cisco Secure Endpoint for somewhat longer. It has been about three years.

I haven't been in touch with them because it's just working.

We used other products such as separate virus scanners. Using all the products from Cisco simplified things. You don't need to worry about whether it's compatible or whether you need to do something special on the antivirus side. It simplified things for me.

I work for customers, and this was set up by our internal IT department. 

I would advise seriously looking into it because, for our users, it's just working perfectly. 

I would rate it a 10 out of 10. There are no complaints.

We use it for DNS security.

It is deployed on the Umbrella cloud dashboard.

Cisco Umbrella helped to improve security by detecting and prohibiting threats.

I like the API. I also like the way Cisco Umbrella uses DNS to block malicious sites before they are opened.

Its general ability to detect and remediate threats is quite good.

The documentation is good, and we have been able to resolve any issues ourselves.

It would be good to have more extensions to third-party products and a client for other device types.

We've been working with Cisco Umbrella for four years.

I have not had any issues with stability.

The initial setup is very easy.

The price is fair, and the licensing cost is based on the number of users. We have seen a good ROI.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, with ten being the very best, I'd rate Cisco Umbrella at nine.

Our clients use Cisco Umbrella compared with SD-WAN or Meraki solutions. They use layer 7 firewall and web proxy in most use cases and fewer DNS security functionalities.

Cisco Umbrella has replaced on-premises firewalls in our client's branches. Our client had one central cloud solution, and now, they no longer need the local firewall.

Our clients have found that Cisco Umbrella increases its security posture because there is a central policy that fits everything.

Though Cisco Talos is usually part of the backend, it is mandatory to have a good solution.

We've been implementing Cisco Umbrella for three years.

I have not seen any issues with scalability.

Cisco's technical support is pretty good. When a solution is available, they will find it. On a scale from one to ten with ten being the best, I'd rate Cisco's technical support at nine.

Positive

We sell both Cisco and Zscaler. If the client already has a Cisco solution, then Umbrella is usually a better fit. In cases when a customer already uses Zscaler, has another SD-WAN solution, or has a different vendor, Zscaler may be the first choice.

As a Cisco Secure reseller, we bring value to our customers through our technicians and engineers who consult with them and implement the solution. This is a benefit from our partner side.

The initial deployment is quite easy. It's internal, and with a few clicks, Cisco Umbrella can be up and running.

Cisco should make the solution cheaper.

The locks and management could be better. The product is fairly new, and it may take some time to get all the features up and running.

Overall, I would rate Cisco Umbrella an eight on a scale from one to ten.

It's usually used for DNS security, to block malicious websites and URLs, and for URL filtration.

It enables us to control access to malicious websites and block them from the start. And the URL filtration enables us to permit some URLs and block others.

You can manage and create policies based on a group of users. It can permit some URLs and block others. For example, we can block Facebook and YouTube.

From the DNS perspective, you can control and block malicious URLs. DNS security is the best way to use it to protect against malicious websites.

Cisco Umbrella provides a cloud management system. We can manage every client from a single workspace because they're in our portal. The single pane of glass management is user-friendly.

I would like to see improvement in the user and group policies. Sometimes it is not very accurate and they apply only to specific users in a group. It needs to be more accurate.

Also, the reporting needs some enhancements.

Finally, the integration with other solutions is a little complex. If you want to integrate with something like ArcSight or LogRhythm or Splunk, you need to do a lot of configuration. There are no easy ways to implement it.

I have been using Cisco Umbrella since 2016. As a solution partner, I implement Cisco Umbrella for customers. I have designed the implementation multiple times for different customers.

I have never heard of an outage in the service. The stability is good. The performance and accessibility are very good. The service is always operational because it runs on multiple servers and multiple load balancers.

It's scalable. Scaling depends on the licensing you have and the number of users. If you want to add a user or an endpoint, they can provide it.

Cisco's support is very good. They provide solutions and they don't take much time to resolve issues.

Positive

When our clients switch to Umbrella, it's either because I suggest it to them or they know about the product and they ask to have it brought into their organizations.

The implementation is easy.

We have a centralized security policy. For the end user traffic from the firewall to go out to the Internet, it traverses through the secure SD-WAN going back to the data center. It passes a lot of proxies, firewalls, and different security checks. Hence, there are some performance issues. Therefore, we asked Cisco to come in and see if there were any products that could improve this situation for the local Internet breakout, and this was the solution that they brought to the table.

We have a remote location that uses Viptela SD-WAN in conjunction with Umbrella.

It adds a lot of value to the environment. The end user has been much happier with their application performance after using it. I don't see any drawbacks with this solution. 

Hybrid work is also kind of important. Some users may be working from home these days, especially after COVID, as they don't necessarily have to come back to the centralized location for security checks. They can have security going out local from their home environment as well. 

The performance has been greatly improved, especially for some of the end users who kept creating tickets and complaining that it was really slow when everything had to go through the central tool for security checks. Now, everything is locally broken out. Also, security now has all the right filters and malware checks.

The malware piece protects the network from malicious attacks. We have had a lower case of security breaches. Therefore, that brings a lot of value to the table.

The content filtering piece is something that really ties back to what my customer is using because they do have some sites that they don't want end users to go to, in order for the security to be locally available, allowing the users to break out to the Internet. The content filtering is a key piece that our customers want to test and use. So, we tested, and it was successful.

The single-pane-of-glass management is very important. Management wants to look at a single frame, then expand it to get the information that they need, without relying on engineers to take it out. Sometimes, engineers need to go down multiple levels to get the information and package it, and then it is possibly not the information that they are looking for. So, it has to be done again.

I have been using the solution for about six months.

We haven't encountered any issues.

The scalability is good. There aren't any limitations with its scalability. We can scale it out.

We have had some tech cases. However, a lot of times we have our account engineers who help out. They are very savvy and knowledgeable. If something is unknown, they will reach out to internal Cisco for help. They are pretty good. I would give them 9 out of 10.

Positive

We did previously use a different solution. 

We wanted to do the local breakout, but our previous solution wasn't able to do it. We spent quite a bit of time testing the other solution, but it just didn't work. This is why we reached out to Cisco.

We did some testing. Network connectivity was a bit of a challenge at the beginning, but we were able to get the right help from Cisco. The POC probably took a month or so

Application performance has greatly improved and there are less operational issues. Productivity has been going up because we have less operational issues. Also, we have happy customers.

Usually when we have a good solution, we share it with our peers who can then bring it to their customer's attention, if they need to solve the same problem.

I would rate this solution anywhere between 8 and 9 out of 10 because it addresses the needs of my customer, but leaving room for improvement.

One of the main use cases of Cisco Umbrella kicked in during the COVID pandemic, as a SASE deployment—secure access, secure edge. Most of the users within a company started working from outside the company and that is when Umbrella became deployed a lot.

One of the most important features is the security posture check which Umbrella offers when a user accesses any website. That is one of the most unique features that it offers.

I would like to see hardware-based integrations. If a hardware platform were provided for Umbrella, that would definitely improve the market for it. The solution is pretty good, but if a hardware-based solution came through, it would meet all the compliance standards in my country.

Especially when we are addressing governmental customers, they hesitate to connect to the cloud. That is where we need a hardware platform so that the solution can be used on-premises as well.

I have been deploying Cisco Umbrella for about five years.

It's quite stable. I've gotten very positive feedback from the customers who have deployed it within their environment. The feedback has been amazing. It's up and running 99.9 percent of the time, since it's a cloud-based solution. We have had no problems related to bugs or any issues like that.

It is very scalable. Although I'm not talking to the clients anymore, I'm sure that the organization I worked with is working with them to spread the solution to more users who were not covered in the initial deployment. There is an adoption roadmap for this product.

Technical support is included as part of the subscription. At any point in time, if you have any queries, there's a 24/7 TAC number available. You can just call and log a case.

I'm also very satisfied with the documentation provided for the solution.

Positive

The previous solution we used was Akamai, but Akamai was more costly compared to Umbrella, and the consumption model was not favorable. Cisco Umbrella cost at least 30 percent less compared to what Akamai offered.

One of the key aspects of Umbrella is the deployment. It takes a matter of just 30 minutes to deploy it in any enterprise and, as soon as it is deployed, it starts to work, so it is seamless. The benefits are realized immediately.

The implementation strategy is pretty straightforward. On the customer's existing hardware you just have to make the entries that will enable the connection to Umbrella and it starts to run. It's a single-person deployment, a single network engineer. That is the beauty of it; you don't require a huge team to deploy it.

Umbrella doesn't require any maintenance. All the updates happen automatically. The configuration is a one-time process.

It can be deployed on the public cloud and private cloud. These are two of the selling factors, although public cloud is more common. It's a multi-location solution but can also be used by a single headquarters. On average, our deployments are for 2,000 endpoints.

If you look at the ROI, Umbrella significantly reduces investment in hardware-based firewalls. For example, typically, an enterprise has to refresh its firewalls every five years. By using Umbrella, they don't have to change their firewalls, rather the security posture is shifted to a cloud-based provider.

There are no hidden costs with Umbrella. Everything is included in the package.

Other than Akamai, there weren't many providers available in India.

One important piece of advice would be to look at your existing framework and see which use cases Umbrella can address. That will make the adoption much easier.

Umbrella is the best product available as of now. 

The first thing that I found most valuable is that there is much differentiation within the licensing so if anyone wants DNS security from the DNS security log, we are there already, and if anyone wants to go to a secure internet gateway, that is also available. We can get the integrated cloud DLP license keys. That is a good benefit with Cisco Umbrella. You can get a complete solution in a single licensing.

Additionally, the cloud firewall is available to integrate if you want. Also, you can create side to side within everything in the cloud.

Right now there are modules just like cloud DLP that are implemented very well. You can just log onto the site, upload and download with the multiple options that are available. That is a good option with Umbrella. Also, you can integrate it with a Cisco Meraki switch as a firewall. That is also a good benefit with Cisco Umbrella.

In terms of what can be improved, it should have more integrations with multiple end user OEMs.

Also, the Linux agent is a big challenge because multiple companies are going with Linux. There is no Linux right now for people working from home and they are looking for security which is not available via Linux. That needs to improve.

I have been using Cisco Umbrella for the last two years.

In terms of the stability, if you're talking about DNS Security, it is very stable. They recently launched Cloud DLP,  so I can't comment on that. We are now working with it, but I do not have too much experience. DNS security is a stable product. There is no issue with that.

Cisco Umbrella is a scalable product. That means, when you have 4,000 users you can take the license for 4,000 users. If they just have 1,500 or 2,000, you can go for that license. Also, on the lower level, if you want 10 licenses, that is also available. That's scalability.

Cisco's technical support is always number one compared to other OEMs.

Deployment and implementation are straightforward for anyone going for the basic certificate for networking, meaning CCNS or CCNP security. The implementation resources are readily available for it. We don't think Cisco has a difficult deployment. Umbrella is very easy. Everything is straightforward. There is no need to Google much for every feature because there is a tab where you can go and configure them. One thing I would like to improve in Umbrella is to have a Linux client available.

On a scale of one to then, I would rate Cisco Umbrella just an eight.

I would recommend it. If you have a Cisco environment, then I must recommend Cisco Umbrella if you have a Cisco Meraki or a Cisco Router solution. There is the option available to integrate and use the firewall, as well. You can deploy policies from the cloud.