CloudLock vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comparison

Cisco and Microsoft are both solutions in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category. Cisco is ranked #23, while Microsoft is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.5. Cisco holds a 0.9% mindshare in CASB, compared to Microsoft’s 5.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Cisco 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 Jun 3, 2026

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and CloudLock are competitors in the Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB) market. Defender for Cloud Apps leads in integration capabilities within Microsoft's ecosystem, while CloudLock stands out for its extensive third-party application support.

Features: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers seamless integration with the Microsoft suite, real-time threat detection, and comprehensive compliance management. CloudLock provides adaptability across diverse platforms, strong policy enforcement, and robust data loss prevention capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps could enhance its third-party app integration, improve alert customization options, and streamline user interface navigation. CloudLock may improve its integration with certain niche platforms, enhance its threat intelligence features, and improve user experience consistency across applications.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Defender for Cloud Apps benefits from efficient deployment in Microsoft environments with responsive customer service. CloudLock offers straightforward cloud-based deployment suitable for diverse IT ecosystems, but customer service experiences can vary.

Pricing and ROI: Defender for Cloud Apps offers cost advantages for Microsoft-centric organizations with efficient ROI through its feature set. CloudLock might have higher initial costs, but the ROI is often justified by its comprehensive feature suite that caters to varied IT landscapes.

To learn more, read our detailed CloudLock vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

CloudLock vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,644 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 June 2026, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 4.4%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CloudLock is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 5.5%, down from 9.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps	5.5%
iboss	4.4%
CloudLock	0.9%
Other	89.2%

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.

Read full review

reviewer779877

Senior Software Engineer with 501-1,000 employees

Screens sensitive data but it should be a bigger part of an end-user device

The only improvement is that it has to be a bigger part of an end-user device. It should look at how endpoints appear on the EDR rather than creating an API to integrate into the agent app which need additional development effort. We have to integrate the source code into the system endpoint and make it as part of the connected app.

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

"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."

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."

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

"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."

"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

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

"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."

More iboss pros

"I like CloudLock because when data gets sent out, I do not want it to get out of the environment. In today's world, a lot of users will remotely use the application. It screens all of the sensitive data. That data will really be as part of the environment that you do not want it to be part of. CloudLock is protection for sensitive data."

"CloudLock is a great solution if you use multiple cloud systems like Google, Salesforce, AWS, and so on, because you can scan all systems with one tool."

"The cloud infrastructure is the solution's most valuable feature."

"It is a good CASB solution for protection of collaboration of content."

"The solution is very stable and reliable."

"It allows us to know where sensitive data is really stored and offers the ability to quarantine based on data types and sharing criteria."

"I like CloudLock because when data gets sent out, I do not want it to get out of the environment."

"Better logging allows us to find problems and take appropriate steps to lock them out."

"One of the most valuable features is auditing. Some of the other protection services have issues with auditing. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has an excellent auditing technique that helps us avoid the risk of filtering or information loss. You can use different tools to guarantee these things. It allows you to conduct an in-depth exploration of applications, users, and files that are harmful or suspicious. You can also enhance your security setup by creating personalized rules or policies that help you better control traffic in the cloud."

"The most valuable feature is the ease of management. It's important."

"Defender for Cloud Apps has given us good visibility regarding what we've allowed in our environment until now. It helps us to know our inventory, understand what our customers are using, and steer them toward safer practices."

"It does a great job of monitoring and maintaining a security baseline. For us, that is a key element. The notifications are pretty good."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is very comprehensive, providing a complete 360-degree view of applications within an organization."

"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."

"We have become more aware of what services our users are using, how often they are using them, and what data is being sent out of the organization and to which services. So, it is really a lot about visibility and helping us make decisions based on that. It drives some of our policy decisions for adding extra security controls."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps pros

Cons

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

"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."

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

"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."

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

"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."

"iboss can be improved because the integration could be better; you need to import all the sites that you access today, and there are a few problems whenever you import thousands of websites, making the integration process messy for the users."

"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."

More iboss cons

"The solution needs to have better integration capabilities. I have a lot of customers asking about how they can integrate it better."

"Like all CASB products, this product also needs to expand its capabilities and features in order to increase scope of application."

"The only improvement is that it has to be a bigger part of an end-user device."

"The only improvement is that it has to be a bigger part of an end-user device. It should look at how endpoints appear on the EDR rather than creating a separate agent. We have to integrate the source code into the system endpoint and make it an agent."

"As long as this issue exists, CloudLock or any other product is only a band-aid solution."

"Sometimes, we'll get false positive alarms. For example, when a SharePoint path has no file sharing, but there is an external user, it will trigger an alarm that the file has been shared with an external user... the alerting mechanism should be more precise when giving you an alert about what activity has been done with the file..."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps’s technical support services needs improvement."

"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 integration with macOS operating systems needs to be better."

"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."

"There have been instances where the alerts generated have been false positives."

"The Cloud App Security integration with external DLP solutions is not so seamless."

"There are certain areas where the product could improve, such as some functionalities that did not work as expected."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

Information not available

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"We utilize the Microsoft E5 licensing, which encompasses the entire Microsoft suite; however, it is costly."

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

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

No data available

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	8

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	19

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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 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 a...

See all answers

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 i...

See all answers

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs iboss

Compared 2% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs CloudLock

Compared 31% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs CloudLock

Compared 21% of the time

Skyhigh Security vs CloudLock

Compared 18% of the time

Oracle CASB Cloud Service vs CloudLock

Compared 12% of the time

Netskope vs CloudLock

Compared 8% of the time

More CloudLock Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 8% of the time

Netskope vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 8% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 7% of the time

Skyhigh Security vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 6% of the time

Qualys VMDR vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 2% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

June 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)

June 2026

Download CloudLock product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

June 2026

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps report

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App 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

CloudLock provides advanced security solutions for cloud-based environments by allowing organizations to monitor, control, and secure data without affecting user functionality.

CloudLock offers an integrated approach to data protection, helping businesses manage compliance and security challenges across their cloud platforms. It enables real-time policy enforcement and anomaly detection across cloud applications, ensuring sensitive data is adequately safeguarded while facilitating seamless collaboration.

What are CloudLock's essential features?

Policy Management: Implements policies to control data access and sharing in cloud environments.
Threat Detection: Identifies suspicious activities using behavioral analytics to enhance security measures.
Compliance Monitoring: Assists organizations in adhering to industry regulations through continuous compliance tracking.
App Discovery: Detects and manages third-party applications connected to organization networks.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Cost Efficiency: Reduces costs by preventing data breaches and compliance penalties.
Operational Efficiency: Streamlines security processes, allowing teams to focus on core objectives.
Risk Reduction: Minimizes risks through comprehensive monitoring and threat intelligence.
Enhanced Security Posture: Strengthens defenses with advanced threat detection capabilities.

In various industries like healthcare and finance, CloudLock is adopted to ensure that data meets regulatory compliance standards. By integrating seamlessly across cloud platforms, businesses in these fields can protect sensitive information, supporting stringent privacy requirements while promoting operational efficiency.

Cisco

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is a robust tool for shadow IT detection, cloud integration, and threat detection, enhancing security management with capabilities in auditing and data protection.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps strengthens cloud security by providing comprehensive insights into user activities, seamlessly integrating with Microsoft security products and platforms like SharePoint, Teams, and OneDrive. Its investigative capabilities enhance threat detection, while real-time alerts and policy applications improve security posture. Organizations benefit from its monitoring, auditing, and privileged identity management features that contribute to enhanced security management and data protection.

What are the key features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps?

Shadow IT Discovery: Identifies and manages unsanctioned applications across cloud environments.
Cloud Integration: Seamlessly connects with Microsoft security products and platforms.
Threat Detection: Offers powerful tools for identifying and mitigating threats in real-time.
Policy Application: Facilitates enforcement of policies across SharePoint, Teams, and OneDrive.
User Activity Visibility: Provides detailed insights into user behavior and actions.

What benefits and ROI should organizations consider?

Enhanced Security Posture: Increases the effectiveness of overall security management.
Real-Time Alerts: Offers immediate notifications to improve response times to threats.
Compliance Support: Aids in maintaining compliance through integrated monitoring and governance.
Data Protection: Protects sensitive corporate data through detailed auditing and monitoring.
Integration with Azure: Enhances threat detection through cohesive integration with Azure services.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps implementation varies across industries, crucial for sectors needing stringent data protection and compliance, like finance and healthcare. Firms use it to monitor user activity, enforce data loss prevention policies, and ensure security across multi-cloud environments while integrating with Azure services for comprehensive threat management. These implementations are particularly beneficial in improving compliance efforts and protecting sensitive data.

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.

Dominion Enterprises, Quality Distribution, Clark Construction Group LLC, Ahold, Middlesex Hospital, Austin Community College (ACC), Dominion Enterprises, The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Oakland Unified School District, Sunnova, Damballa, Financial Times, Boise State University

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

Buyer's Guide

CloudLock vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

June 2026

Free Report: CloudLock vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudLock vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CloudLock 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.