No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo

Top 10 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Alternatives

Vendor: Microsoft
4.2 out of 5
Leave a review

Top Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include iboss, Cloudflare One, and Cisco Umbrella. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps surpasses its competitors by offering comprehensive security management, advanced threat detection, and seamless integration with Microsoft 365, providing enhanced visibility and control over cloud applications to ensure data protection and compliance.

Microsoft Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Microsoft, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
iboss
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
iboss
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in Microsoft environment integration with seamless operations and threat detection. In comparison, iboss offers extensive network traffic scanning and easy cloud integration. A tech buyer might choose Defender for the ecosystem synergy or iboss for comprehensive network security.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. iboss Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a lower setup cost, while iboss requires a larger initial investment. Defender's competitive pricing contrasts with iboss, which may appeal more to enterprises seeking robust security features despite higher costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a lower setup cost, while iboss requires a larger initial investment. Defender's competitive pricing contrasts with iboss, which may appeal more to enterprises seeking robust security features despite higher costs.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cloudflare One
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cloudflare One
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in integration with Microsoft technologies, offering comprehensive security and strong visibility. In comparison, Cloudflare One focuses on ease of use and cost-effectiveness, emphasizing straightforward DDoS protection with transparent pricing, making it appealing for new users.
Download Cloudflare One vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves initial setup expenses, while Cloudflare One offers a lower-cost setup option. The key difference lies in the setup cost, highlighting Microsoft Defender's higher initial financial commitment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves initial setup expenses, while Cloudflare One offers a lower-cost setup option. The key difference lies in the setup cost, highlighting Microsoft Defender's higher initial financial commitment.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cisco Umbrella
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cisco Umbrella
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in seamless integration within Microsoft environments but lacks flexibility with non-Microsoft platforms. In comparison, Cisco Umbrella offers strong DNS protection and traffic management. Defender maximizes Microsoft investments, while Umbrella simplifies deployment across diverse infrastructures.
Download Cisco Umbrella vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a low initial setup cost, making it more accessible, while Cisco Umbrella's higher setup cost may appeal to organizations prioritizing advanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a low initial setup cost, making it more accessible, while Cisco Umbrella's higher setup cost may appeal to organizations prioritizing advanced features.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks
4.1 out of 5

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is preferred over Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks for its quicker setup, extensive threat detection capabilities, seamless integration, user-friendly interface, and responsive customer service.

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a minimal setup cost, with transparent pricing and flexible licensing options. In comparison, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks also offers competitive pricing, affordable setup costs, and a user-friendly licensing process.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a minimal setup cost, with transparent pricing and flexible licensing options. In comparison, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks also offers competitive pricing, affordable setup costs, and a user-friendly licensing process.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides extensive integration within its ecosystem, enhancing identity security and seamless management. In comparison, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform offers superior scalability and ease of deployment across environments. Both solutions have distinct strengths, catering to varied organizational needs and preferences.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically incurs a lower setup cost compared to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, making it a more budget-friendly option with initial implementation, whereas Zscaler might offer more comprehensive features justifying its higher setup cost.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically incurs a lower setup cost compared to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, making it a more budget-friendly option with initial implementation, whereas Zscaler might offer more comprehensive features justifying its higher setup cost.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cato SASE Cloud Platform
4.5 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers robust integration within Microsoft ecosystems, excelling in threat detection and enterprise security. In comparison, Cato SASE Cloud Platform provides strong SASE capabilities, favored for easy deployment and performance. Each brings unique benefits for tech buyers seeking specific solutions.
Download Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires a moderate setup cost, whereas Cato SASE Cloud Platform has a minimal setup expense, highlighting the cost differences in deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires a moderate setup cost, whereas Cato SASE Cloud Platform has a minimal setup expense, highlighting the cost differences in deployment.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Netskope
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Netskope
4.2 out of 5
Netskope focuses on cloud security, managing access and data protection for cloud-hosted resources. Providing CASB, Secure Web Gateway, and DLP, it enhances policy management, real-time protection, and shadow IT detection. Users appreciate its interface, deployment, and technical support. Challenges include integration, pricing, and advanced threat protection needs.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Netskope Report
Pricing is a little expensive but it is affordable.
They should work on licensing costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Pricing is a little expensive but it is affordable.
They should work on licensing costs.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Palo Alto Networks WildFire
4.2 out of 5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire excels in threat detection with real-time updates, offering high availability. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps ensures cloud security with seamless Microsoft integration. WildFire is complex and costly; Defender is quick to deploy and cost-effective within Microsoft plans.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire Report
Palo Alto Networks WildFire features a higher setup cost, offering advanced threat protection capabilities, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps presents a more budget-friendly alternative focusing on cloud security integration.
View comparison
Pricing
Palo Alto Networks WildFire features a higher setup cost, offering advanced threat protection capabilities, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps presents a more budget-friendly alternative focusing on cloud security integration.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Anomali
3.9 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Anomali
3.9 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is favored for its cost-value advantage, offering seamless Azure integration and efficient support. In comparison, Anomali excels in feature depth with its comprehensive threat intelligence, providing tailored support and deployment options for those needing advanced analytics capabilities.
Download Anomali vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps entails a straightforward initial setup, whereas Anomali's setup process might require more effort. The difference in setup complexities highlights the contrasting approaches and user readiness needed for each solution.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps entails a straightforward initial setup, whereas Anomali's setup process might require more effort. The difference in setup complexities highlights the contrasting approaches and user readiness needed for each solution.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers threat detection, Microsoft ecosystem integration, and user behavior analytics. In comparison, Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline focuses on network visibility and packet filtering for deep traffic analysis. Defender excels in integration; Gigamon prioritizes network optimization.
Download Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a moderate setup cost, while Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline incurs a higher initial setup expense, distinguishing itself with advanced capabilities requiring significant investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a moderate setup cost, while Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline incurs a higher initial setup expense, distinguishing itself with advanced capabilities requiring significant investment.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Skyhigh Security
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Skyhigh Security
4.2 out of 5
Skyhigh Security aids organizations in auditing internet behavior, cloud security, and endpoint protection. It enhances web content control, user monitoring, and data loss prevention. Known for Shadow IT identification, it integrates with tools like IBM QRadar, yet needs better API support, quicker reporting, and a more intuitive interface.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security Report
Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost.
The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost.
The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
The NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai
4.4 out of 5
NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai is used for penetration testing. It integrates with vulnerability management, offering automated testing, GPU-powered tasks, cloud deployment, and actionable insights. Users benefit from streamlined processes like vulnerability prioritization, network scans, and fast synchronization, though demand exists for enhanced reporting, threat detection, and better naming conventions.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. The NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai Report
View comparison
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is ideal for integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, offering advanced threat protection features. In comparison, Morphisec provides lightweight, signatureless defense, focusing on simplicity and effectiveness for endpoint security, appealing to those needing standalone solutions.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Morphisec Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has higher setup costs compared to Morphisec. This difference highlights a pricing advantage for Morphisec, appealing to users with budget constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has higher setup costs compared to Morphisec. This difference highlights a pricing advantage for Morphisec, appealing to users with budget constraints.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall
4.1 out of 5
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall excels in firewall capabilities, offering robust scalability and ease of management, ideal for enterprises seeking a comprehensive solution with minimal staffing. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides strong integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, appealing to organizations prioritizing cloud security.
Download Barracuda CloudGen Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall offers a straightforward setup cost that is often lower, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps tends to have a varied setup cost, highlighting clear pricing differences between the solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall offers a straightforward setup cost that is often lower, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps tends to have a varied setup cost, highlighting clear pricing differences between the solutions.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Trellix Network Detection and Response
4.2 out of 5
Trellix Network Detection and Response offers advanced detection capabilities for zero-day attacks and malware analysis. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps focuses on integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, providing comprehensive threat detection and application visibility, ideal for organizations utilizing Microsoft's suite of tools.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response Report
Trellix Network Detection and Response involves an initial setup cost, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides a cost-effective and user-friendly setup. Trellix offers advanced detection capabilities, while Microsoft seamlessly integrates with existing cloud environments.
View comparison
Pricing
Trellix Network Detection and Response involves an initial setup cost, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides a cost-effective and user-friendly setup. Trellix offers advanced detection capabilities, while Microsoft seamlessly integrates with existing cloud environments.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Check Point Infinity
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in integration and visibility for Microsoft-centric environments but faces pricing challenges. In comparison, Check Point Infinity offers strong cross-platform security but has a complex pricing model. Each caters to different organizational security needs with unique ecosystem strengths.
Download Check Point Infinity vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps reviews highlight low initial setup costs, whereas Check Point Infinity's reviews mention higher setup expenses, making a significant distinction between the two solutions in terms of budget considerations.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps reviews highlight low initial setup costs, whereas Check Point Infinity's reviews mention higher setup expenses, making a significant distinction between the two solutions in terms of budget considerations.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint ONE
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint ONE
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps appeals to tech buyers for seamless integration with Microsoft's suite, providing cost-effective security. In comparison, Forcepoint ONE attracts those prioritizing advanced features and flexible deployment, offering robust protection and adaptability despite higher initial costs.
Download Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires minimal setup cost, while Forcepoint ONE involves higher initial expenses. Differences in setup investment highlight varying pricing approaches between these solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires minimal setup cost, while Forcepoint ONE involves higher initial expenses. Differences in setup investment highlight varying pricing approaches between these solutions.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Akamai Enterprise Application Access
4.5 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers ease of integration and advanced threat protection, attracting those invested in Microsoft ecosystems. In comparison, Akamai Enterprise Application Access focuses on secure access and robust DDoS protection, appealing to enterprises needing comprehensive security despite higher costs.
Download Akamai Enterprise Application Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Akamai Enterprise Application Access features a more complex pricing structure. Notably, Microsoft focuses on ease of setup, contrasting with Akamai's more intricate entry process.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Akamai Enterprise Application Access features a more complex pricing structure. Notably, Microsoft focuses on ease of setup, contrasting with Akamai's more intricate entry process.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in integration within Microsoft systems and provides strong threat detection, ideal for Microsoft-centric environments. In comparison, Veritas Alta SaaS Protection offers comprehensive data protection and backup, appealing to those prioritizing data integrity across cloud environments.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Veritas Alta SaaS Protection Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically involves moderate setup costs, while Veritas Alta SaaS Protection often incurs higher setup expenses. Microsoft Defender's lower initial investment can be a significant consideration compared to Veritas Alta's potentially larger initial financ...
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically involves moderate setup costs, while Veritas Alta SaaS Protection often incurs higher setup expenses. Microsoft Defender's lower initial investment can be a significant consideration compared to Veritas Alta's potentially larger initial financ...
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Check Point SandBlast Network
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers seamless integration within Microsoft products, ideal for those deeply embedded in its ecosystem. In comparison, Check Point SandBlast Network excels with strong threat prevention features, appealing to high-security environments prioritizing robust zero-day protection and threat management.
Download Check Point SandBlast Network vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves a higher setup cost than Check Point SandBlast Network, making it less feasible for those with limited budgets, whereas Check Point SandBlast Network provides a cost-effective setup option for businesses prioritizing budget constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves a higher setup cost than Check Point SandBlast Network, making it less feasible for those with limited budgets, whereas Check Point SandBlast Network provides a cost-effective setup option for businesses prioritizing budget constraints.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Obsidian CDR Platform
1 out of 5
Obsidian CDR Platform efficiently centralizes data management, providing reliable integration and analytics capabilities. Valuable features include comprehensive data processing and robust security measures. There is room for improvement in enhancing performance speed and expanding support for diverse data types.
View comparison
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Symantec Advanced Threat Protection
3.9 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in seamless integration within Microsoft environments, offering comprehensive threat protection. In comparison, Symantec Advanced Threat Protection focuses on robust endpoint-to-network security, providing critical threat analysis ideal for enterprises with complex infrastructure requirements.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Symantec Advanced Threat Protection Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection involves a higher initial expense.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection involves a higher initial expense.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint CASB
3.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint CASB
3.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps supports seamless integration with Microsoft products, enhancing identity security and threat detection. In comparison, Forcepoint CASB offers comprehensive data protection and cloud visibility. Tech buyers may choose Microsoft for integration or Forcepoint for robust data features.
Download Forcepoint CASB vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels with lower setup costs, while Forcepoint CASB offers robust features at a higher initial price, highlighting a trade-off between affordability and comprehensive capabilities in cloud service security.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels with lower setup costs, while Forcepoint CASB offers robust features at a higher initial price, highlighting a trade-off between affordability and comprehensive capabilities in cloud service security.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers seamless integration and ease of deployment, ideal for those in the Microsoft ecosystem. In comparison, Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker excels in threat protection and data loss prevention, appealing to organizations prioritizing advanced security features despite more complex setup.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps often highlights its competitive setup cost as a cost-effective solution, whereas Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker may incur higher initial setup expenses, reflecting the distinct strategic approaches of each provider towards implementation and inte...
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps often highlights its competitive setup cost as a cost-effective solution, whereas Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker may incur higher initial setup expenses, reflecting the distinct strategic approaches of each provider towards implementation and inte...
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
VMware vDefend Advanced Threat Prevention
1 out of 5
VMware vDefend Advanced Threat Prevention protects networks with features like real-time threat detection and AI-based analysis. Users find value in its adaptability to various environments. While efficient, some suggest enhancements in reporting capabilities to facilitate clearer insights into threats for improved response actions.
View comparison
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Symantec CloudSOC CASB
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers seamless Microsoft 365 integration and cost-effective pricing. In comparison, Symantec CloudSOC CASB provides extensive security features and detailed control, appealing to organizations needing comprehensive security. Microsoft suits existing Microsoft users, while Symantec caters to those requiring robust cloud security.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Symantec CloudSOC CASB Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a lower initial setup cost, while Symantec CloudSOC CASB involves higher setup expenses, indicating potential differences in pricing strategy and initial accessibility.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a lower initial setup cost, while Symantec CloudSOC CASB involves higher setup expenses, indicating potential differences in pricing strategy and initial accessibility.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
CASB
1 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
CASB
1 out of 5
CASB enhances security by providing real-time monitoring, risk assessment, and data loss prevention. It offers valuable features like seamless integration with cloud services and customizable policies. There is room for improvement in terms of scalability and user configurability, which could be refined to better meet varying business demands.
View comparison
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
CloudLock
3.9 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
CloudLock
3.9 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps appeals to those seeking scalability and seamless Azure integration. In comparison, CloudLock caters to organizations needing strong compliance management and governance. Microsoft Defender suits Microsoft environments, while CloudLock is versatile for diverse IT configurations.
Download CloudLock vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has higher setup costs compared to CloudLock, which offers a more budget-friendly option for initial setup expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has higher setup costs compared to CloudLock, which offers a more budget-friendly option for initial setup expenses.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Fortinet FortiCASB
3.5 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Fortinet FortiCASB
3.5 out of 5
Fortinet FortiCASB enhances cloud security with features like data loss prevention and compliance checks. It supports multiple cloud platforms efficiently. Some users find reporting capabilities and integration options could be improved to better meet diverse environments. It offers reliable CASB functionalities for secure cloud usage.
View comparison

Related categories

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
Microsoft Security Suite