Cato SASE Cloud Platform Reviews

We use the solution to access network and security platforms. It also offers in-built WAN and zero-trust security models. It is possible to detect and mitigate the incident using Cato.

The solution helps customers with well-integrated features, including security and network visibility.

The solution provides all the essential technical features combined in a single platform.

Adapting the solution for tier-one businesses with complicated environments and pre-existing technologies like VPN is challenging. They should improve this particular area. Also, they should include a web application firewall feature.

The solution is stable. However, sometimes, the console operates at variable speeds on the servers.

The solution is easily scalable in terms of firewall protection.

The solution's technical support is available 24/7. Once, we raised a ticket for our customer, and the executive immediately reached us in 10 minutes via Zoom meeting. Further, he solved the problem in the next 20 minutes. I am impressed with their service.

Positive

The solution's initial setup process is easy. Also, it is inexpensive to deploy domestic internet lines using the socket. It has automated functionality as well. The provisioning in the administration screen takes an hour to complete remotely. Also, replacing MPS lines with the solution takes a month. Here, we use second cellular lines as a backup. We are able to switch one to three lines per day.

The solution's pricing is flexible. The customers can pay as per their requirements. Although, it is more expensive than Palo Alto and Fortinet products.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. Its pricing is flexible but could be even better.

It is a primary router for the network. It is a cloud solution with on-prem routers. Basically, we got a router here, and we utilize our network connections to get to Cato Network's cloud. We route our traffic through their cloud for security and everything else.

It helps with network stability and reliability.

The WAN aggregation feature is the most valuable.

Its functionality is a bit limited in some areas as compared to a Cisco solution. It is not as granular. It doesn't have the manageability, feature set, and capabilities of a larger or an enterprise-level solution. It just needs a more robust feature set and granularity.

I have been using this solution since June, that is, about six months.

Its stability is pretty good so far. I had a couple of minor issues here and there, but not too bad.

It is hard to say because we don't have a lot of demands or requirements for that. We're not a large shop, so we're not looking to expand so much that we would have to replace them, upgrade them, or push the boundaries of the current system. It is expected to last us for a while at this capacity and configuration. We have 200 users, and it is just a typical office warehouse environment.

They are good and responsive. They solved all the issues.

We were using Palo Alto.

It was pretty basic. It is easy to manage.

You require one experienced IT person for its deployment and maintenance. It wasn't complicated for me, but I've been around. Somebody new to IT or a desktop support guy won't be able to deploy it. Somebody who is a network person and has a good network or IT experience can deploy and manage it with little or no assistance in a company of our size.

We had support from Cato Networks. They helped us with the deployment, and they were good.

It is going to give a return on investment. We have AT&T, Comcast, and a couple of others, but AT&T stability was hit or miss, and it would go down. The ability for this system to handle outages on one circuit out of four meant that we didn't have any downtime because of one of our circuits going down or having a performance issue. It kept our network up, whereas our previous solution, even at the cost of it, had to fail over, and even when it failed over, there were manual things you had to do for the other issues, which caused the downtime.

You pay yearly based on the speed of your network. If you increase the speed of your network, you increase the cost for your throughput. It is by bandwidth for the most part and then licenses for VPN. There is some per-seat licensing for VPN access, but the majority of it is minimal. It is like $30 a year per client. The rest is based on how much bandwidth you'll use. You pay for that upfront for the year, and if you have to increase it, you increase it, and then they let you send more data through. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We looked at other SD-WAN solutions, such as Fellow Cloud, Palo Alto, and Cisco. There were a couple more in there. Price, capability, and ease of deployment and management made us go for Cato Networks.

It is worth looking at for a small to medium size environment, but it has got to fit your situation. We don't use it for what it was really made to do. It just has one feature that affects us, so we use it for that. In all honesty, it is not something that we are really using to its full potential.

I would rate Cato Networks an eight out of ten. It is fairly new, so there are some things that it should do, and they're working on it. 

We primarily use the platform for monitoring purposes. It serves as a SaaS solution integrated with SD-WAN and security functionalities.

The product's most valuable features include advanced firewall capabilities for robust security, a secure gateway for safe data transmission, and next-generation anti-malware for threat prevention. Additionally, the SASE framework integrates well with our operational needs, ensuring comprehensive security and compliance.

The product's technical support could be more responsive.

I have been using the Cato SASE Cloud Platform for around seven months.

I rate the product stability a nine. 

The product accommodates varying customer requirements effectively, facilitating easy scaling as needed.

I would rate the scalability an eight. 

The technical support services need improvement. 

Positive

The initial setup process was straightforward, taking about one to one and a half hours. It involved minimal complexities, handled efficiently by two individuals, primarily myself.

Based on studies from Forrester, our organization has achieved a significant return on investment of approximately 246% within less than six months of deploying Cato.

The platform is expensive. 

Cato's user-friendly dashboard has contributed positively to our experience, making it suitable for our current operational needs.

Integrating SD-WAN has significantly optimized our network performance by enabling path selection for optimal traffic routing, WAN optimization through protocol acceleration, and seamless traffic encryption without compromising performance.

I rate it an eight. 

We're an implementer. We sell this solution to our customers. We've done some POCs with clients so far. 

The solution is stable and reliable. 

Our customers haven't had any complaints about its quality.

It is quite simple and easy to use. 

The support, overall, has been okay.

So far, we find the setup process to be simple. 

I haven't seen any issues so far. I might need to do another implementation and work on it longer before noting any flaws. 

They're not English. If they were English, I'd give them an overall rating of ten out of ten. 

There's no principal in Malaysia, only a distributor. 

I just recently started using the solution. I

I've used the solution for about six months. 

The solution has been stable and it is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

On our POC we have about 300 users. 

Technical support has been good so far. We find them to be helpful and supportive. We're in Malaysia and our closest principal is in Singapore, and they always get back to us.

Positive

I'd rate the product's ease of setup at a 4.7 out of five. It's very straightforward and easy to implement. There isn't really any complexity. 

We deployed the product as a POC within a week.

It's too early to really analyze ROI. 

I have compared the pricing against other solutions and found it to be very reasonable. I'd rate the cost, in terms of affordability, eight out of ten. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's simple to use and easy to set up. On top of that, they are very supportive.

The solution is used similarly to a VPN connection but using a cable network. It is used for the several branches of the company.

The most valuable feature of Cato Networks is the CASB and the documentation is useful.

Modifying or incorporating Cato Network to work with a third-party platform, such as Microsoft, or other Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) offerings would be beneficial. Having more integration partners would help the users implement the solution.

I have used Cato Networks within the past 12 months.

Cato Networks is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The support has been good overall.

I have used Zscaler and it is a better solution than Cato Networks because they are more aggressive and have many partners, such as Microsoft and Dell. The implementation of Zscaler would be a more resilient solution.

The initial setup of Cato Networks is straightforward. For 100 branched the implementation took six months to implement.

The vendor helped implement the solution with us, and it was a seamless process

The price of Cato Networks is in the middle range compared to other solutions. NetFoundry is a less expensive solution than Cato Networks.

In the Philippines, there is a good market for this solution. There is a 50 percent SaaS implementation of this solution.

I rate Cato Networks an eight out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is to replace the routers we have and to combine the various ISP into one trunk.

It gives us higher internet bandwidth.

The feature that I find to be the most valuable is the bandwidth aggregation.

They can't do one-to-one NAT (Network Address Translation) in AP (their access point), and that is something that Palo Alto can do.

I have been using this solution for a few months.

We are using the most current version. It's a SAAS solution.

Cato Networks is stable.

It seems to be scalable, but we are a small company. Everyone in the company uses it. We are using their VPN for everyone who is working at home. All of the internet traffic is flowing through it. We have 175 people int total.

The technical support is very good. I would rate them a nine or ten out of ten.

They have been quite good for us.

Previously, we were using Palo Alto. 

We switched from Palo Alto because the renewal costs were getting expensive.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The price is not an issue for us, as it is priced more competitively than some other vendors.

It's a cloud solution. It has local hardware, but it's a could solution.

If it's a good use case for you, then it's a good solution. Cato Networks seems to do everything we wanted it to do.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

What I found most helpful in Cato Networks is that it works out of the box. One of its main advantages is that it's a simple product to deploy. You subscribe, and you're ready to run.

For a packaged solution, needing external intervention or a system integrator to get other features not offered by Cato Networks could be an area for improvement.

Cato Networks does what it's meant to do and is even overstretching capabilities when introducing new features. The product can only have very few features added on top of what its currently doing. Managed service providers can deliver the extra features you'd need. It's a set of managed services, and what Cato Networks does is very comprehensive.

So, for the time being, when the actual incarnation of the SASE solution is deployed, Cato Networks is a very effective product. Naturally, technology will evolve, so everybody knows that in three, four, or five years, there will be a new kid on the block, a new game. Still, at the moment, Cato Networks only needs to improve a little regarding SASE delivery. The product is doing very well, but one feature the Cato Networks team is doing right is preparing for the future through deploying the SSE 360, so the security service is at that edge. It's an excellent strategy to prepare for the future. SSE 360 is what Cato Networks should invest in the most to keep prospering.

I've been using Cato Networks for about three years.

Cato Networks is a very stable product. It's one of the top products in the SASE category, especially regarding stability.

Scalability-wise, Cato Networks is entirely scalable for what it does. I never found any problems scaling it. Apart from being very stable, Cato Networks is also very scalable.

The technical support team for Cato Networks has to be inevitably involved, especially in interfacing with other networks and data centers. I found the support very responsive. It's a very professional company, and I'd rate technical support as five out of five.

Cato Networks has a straightforward setup. There's very little to set up because it's a SASE solution, so there's no complexity in terms of programming it.

I'd rate its initial setup a five out of five.

Cato Networks is an expensive product, but it works out of the box, so that's the usual trade-off, make versus buy. If you decide to buy a product that doesn't require much programming, then you'd want to go for Cato Networks, which will work naturally, and immediately without any complex setup. However, the product is a little bit more expensive than the competitors.

On a scale of one to five, I'd rate the pricing for Cato Networks as four.

I have some experience with Cato Networks and its competitors.

My advice to anyone who wants to install or use Cato Networks is that the technical aspects would not be very relevant for a SASE solution because, today, you have outstanding solutions in the SASE realm. However, suppose you're undertaking a digital transformation effort. In that case, you must have an excellent consultant who can guide you in choosing among the myriad of products available in the market. You must define a clear digital strategy to understand if Cato Networks matches your digital strategy.

The next step involves checking if Cato Networks can meet your specific needs or use cases. The product is straightforward, but that also means it has some limitations. If you don't want to program as much, Cato Networks is for you, but that could also mean sacrificing other features, such as increased flexibility and total control of the system. Cato Networks is a black box, so you connect and use it, but you don't know what happens inside, though it's precisely what some clients want. Cato Networks is the perfect solution if the client wants to connect offices and premises in different regions.

You have to be fully aware that Cato Networks doesn't allow you complete control over it, but it's easy to use. There's no perfect solution in the market. It would be best if you had a system architect or consultant to guide you in your choice. If you make the wrong choice, you could have an excellent product that doesn't fit your needs. Making the right decision sometimes isn't based on the technology but on the IT strategy. This is what ninety-nine percent of companies miss today. Technology is all good, but you need a sound IT strategy for making your decision.

My rating for Cato Networks is eight out of ten because it's an excellent product, especially for what it offers. It isn't a ten for me, simply because when you deploy a SASE solution, especially in the environments my company serves, you need to implement additional features which aren't part and parcel of what Cato Networks is delivering, such as an integrated solution.

Suppose a client wants a perfect solution rated as ten out of ten. In that case, the client needs to employ a system integrator or a managed service provider that can add additional features to the top, as it's not the mission of Cato Networks to deliver other features. Cato Networks does an excellent job, but it wouldn't get a ten from me. However, no packaged SASE solution can cover all aspects and all client needs. You'll need an external intervention or someone adding features to what Cato Networks delivers. This is more of a category limitation rather than a company limitation. Cato Networks does an excellent job, so it gets the maximum score that can be assigned to the category for packaged solutions, which is an eight.

We have the sockets on-premise, some little small boxes that connect to the internet. You could have multiple providers connected to the socket, which connects over the internet to their ports. We use their infrastructure as a service.

The solution's primary use case is to have redundant ISP internet links and use their network for security purposes, ease of administration, and management. We use their firewall as a service too.

It's a pretty straightforward solution, and anything beyond that, we can easily contact support and have them maintain it for us. It does what it's supposed to do, and I like it.

The price could be better. Because of the price, we are considering moving to Cisco Meraki. It's our understanding that we could accomplish the same thing for less money.

I've been using Cato Networks for about two years.

Cato Networks is stable. Everything is dependent on the bandwidth that comes from the ISP. Because we have multiple ISPs connected, if one is having an issue, the other connection isn't. We never really had any outages.

Based on what we have now, if we wanted more bandwidth, we would literally have to go to the internet provider for that. That's not really a Cato issue. Cato is, at best, the infrastructure, but you still need it from your ISP. If you under-subscribed, then you won't get the expected performance. You have to rightsize it depending on how many users are using it and all of that. 

I believe in continuous improvement, but the challenges in the past, let's say we need to connect to a cloud service that you're not familiar with and we want to use Cato, we pretty much call support and tell them what we're trying to do. They bill us, and we pay for it. If you need additional network support from another vendor, we use a consultant between all parties to get the job done.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give technical support an eight.

We had Cisco ASA devices and firewalls. It had a lot of complexity, and you needed special technical skill sets on staff, which we didn't have. We just wanted a simpler solution to get the job done, and Cato provided it.

The initial setup is straightforward. If there's any complexity, usually they have some excellent support engineers on staff that we're able to work with, and they seem to make it seamless.

We use direct support from the vendor, and when we needed additional support, we had a consultant who specializes in Cisco.

Cato Networks seems more expensive than Cisco Meraki.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cato Networks an eight.