No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Forcepoint ONE vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 7, 2024

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
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), ZTNA as a Service (8th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Forcepoint ONE
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (9th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (11th)
Microsoft Defender for Clou...
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (14th), Microsoft Security Suite (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.3%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint ONE is 2.1%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 5.5%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps5.5%
iboss3.3%
Forcepoint ONE2.1%
Other89.1%
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
reviewer2765397 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Engineer at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Delivers reliable policy control and improves data protection across cloud and endpoints
The best features Forcepoint ONE offers include the DLP engine with predefined policies for common data types that help us determine and use it directly, as well as cloud app control to protect SaaS platforms like Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. We are also helped by the Incident Management Dashboard for quick review and policy tuning, along with integration with Forcepoint Endpoint DLP, allowing us consistent enforcement across devices. The DLP engine and Incident Management Dashboard have made our work much more efficient in daily operations, as detection accuracy reduces the need for manual review, and the centralized dashboard helps us quickly identify which incidents need escalation or policy adjustment. It shortens response time for our clients, allowing their security team to view incidents in real-time, classify them easily, and focus on genuine risks instead of sorting through false positives, and it simplifies reporting and audit preparation since all the relevant data is consolidated in one place. One feature that really stands out for us and our client is the seamless integration between Forcepoint ONE and the on-premise Forcepoint DLP, as it allows consistent data protection policy across both cloud and endpoint environments, making it much easier to manage. Forcepoint ONE has positively impacted our organization by streamlining DLP policy management and reducing time spent on troubleshooting and manual reviews, providing faster compliance reporting for internal needs and compliance with local regulation, and improving visibility into how sensitive data moves across cloud and endpoint environments. Overall, it helps our customers operate more efficiently and confidently in enforcing data protection controls.
FV
Security and Continuity Manager at Rolinco NV
Deployment has been seamless with insightful data categorization and enhanced control
The features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that I have found most valuable include the overall portal view, with bubble graphs which give us insight into what goes where in the categorization, nowadays with Generative AI but all kinds of categorization, collaboration, etc. That central view of the portal is very useful for us. 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. Therefore, we can add more control, and we have already done so. This was not possible in the old solution, in the old CASB solution with Netskope. We now can see on the spot, and we do that almost weekly, what the end users are utilizing, which cloud providers or cloud apps they're using. The visibility into OAuth apps provided by Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is very good. The visibility into risk and risk management of our organization's Generative AI apps is very nice, as you can choose the category Generative AI and then see exactly what traffic has been going to and from Generative AI in the cloud. This makes us very insightful on what is used within the company. We have some policies on blocking specific Generative AI, and we use within our company one particular AI part, which is CoPilot of Microsoft. In this way, we can see what the end users are using other than CoPilot, and that makes us more in control. The effectiveness of the integration of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender XDR and defending against SaaS attacks is very intuitive. It works immediately if we create a new policy or in Purview or in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, or when we make an app unsanctioned by blocking it, then it is almost immediately, or at least within a couple of hours, effective on all the endpoints where the EDR is running. This gives us much better control over things than before.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"It is overall a good solution for securing against data breaches and attacks, but there is no 100 percent guarantee in software."
"The core CASB solution is the most valuable part. It allows us to put policies in place around which devices can log into our cloud applications. We have a policy that states that only company devices can access these cloud applications."
"The solution is very good when it comes to securing us against data leakage, because of the other proxy. It also has API scanning or data at rest. It inspects data in motion, which is the proxy, and then it has the data at rest, which is the API scanning. We can inspect for anything we want: file fingerprinting, PHI-sensitive data, PCI-sensitive data. It does not matter. We can usually find it and block it in transit and do our remediation with it. It could either be block, encrypt, or allow and watermark the file to follow it and see where it goes. It allows for those different scenarios."
"The pricing is very good and cheaper than other solutions like Netskope and Forcepoint."
"The most valuable feature was the website blocking capability, which allowed me to quickly block any dodgy websites."
"It has given us a more secure environment."
"Overall, knowing what I know now, a year and two months later, and having been through this whole Bitglass deployment with the issues that we've had that were not Bitglass' fault, I would still choose the same product today."
"Without having Bitglass, our work from home strategy would be drastically different and our potential for productivity would be reduced."
"All of the features are valuable because all of the features are related."
"Microsoft Cloud App Security brings them together onto the same platform from a security standpoint, and the application can run seamlessly across different clouds, which helps."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its monitoring."
"The solution is helping a lot; we get very detailed reporting on security that really shows what users are doing, including what they've opened, what they're sharing, downloading, viewing, and when they are logging in."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of management; the management is cloud-based and we can work inside or outside on public networks."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of management. It's important."
"The favorite feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is the categorical blocking capability, which appears to be fed from Microsoft Security Intelligence feeds that seem to be better than other solutions and allows for dynamic configuration, cutting down on potential issues from manually managing block lists."
"The benefit you get is that you are able to monitor all your applications and control the data that goes out of those applications."
 

Cons

"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"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."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability within the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing."
"Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement."
"In our environment, when an Active Directory password changes, we tend to have some latency issues with access. It takes about 15 minutes before that password is accessible through Bitglass after the change."
"While implementing Forcepoint ONE has been very smooth and efficient, the proof of concept phase can be slow, particularly on S3."
"I wish they would advance more into the endpoint DLP solution."
"Forcepoint ONE can be improved in scalability to handle more hybrid environments."
"The sales staff promised more than they can deliver, but the technical staff is excellent."
"I rate Forcepoint ONE a seven because it needs improvement in reporting and integrations."
"Integration into different multi-factor authentication tools. On their page, they tout Duo, but I don't use Duo."
"They need to improve the attack surface reduction (ASR) rules. In the latest version, you can implement ASR rules, which are quite useful, but you have to enable those because if they're not enabled, they flag false positives. In the Defender portal, it logs a block for WMI processes and PowerShell. Apparently, it's because ASR rules are not configured. So, you generally have to enable them to exclude, for example, WMI queries or PowerShell because they have a habit of blocking your security scanners. It's a bit weird that they have to be enabled to be configured, and it's not the other way around."
"We are having trouble with our continuous reporting configuration and struggling with configuring the collector properly with our log parsing."
"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..."
"An area of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that needs to be improved or enhanced is the reporting function. In the beginning, there was a good reporting function which gave us a sort of monthly overview report. But that has gone away."
"They should continue integration with all other Microsoft security-related products. The integration with all the other products is still ongoing."
"If you have more elaborate needs or if you have some more sophisticated use cases, for example, if you need an in-line component, or if you need to distinguish between sanctioned and unsanctioned applications, this solution doesn't cut it."
"They should continue integration with all other Microsoft security-related products."
"I would like to see them include more features in the older licenses. There are some features that are not available, such as preventing or analyzing cloud attacks."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"There is training involved. If you're going to add more people to it, such as cross train more of your group, there's a cost. Other than that, that's it. We have paid exactly what the invoices have said. We signed a three-year contract and not gone above it."
"When considering only the cost, the solution may appear to be costly; however, when evaluated in terms of commercial value, Bitglass is not expensive."
"The licensing cost for Forcepoint ONE would depend on the features, but the pricing is very competitive here in Brazil. The solution offers a good price, and I would rate it a three or a four in terms of pricing. I don't have information on whether there are additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees for Forcepoint ONE."
"The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three."
"We have our pricing by user. We do our pricing agreements annually. There are also additional costs for maintenance."
"Typically, the longer you price forward, the better off you're going to be. They have been very willing to work with us on pricing."
"We have an educational licensing agreement. It's a customer agreement for multiple years."
"It is a little bit expensive. When you want to have the complete package with Office 365, Defender, and everything else, it is expensive."
"We are an MST and we do not pay for the solution. However, the price of the solution could be better."
"It has pretty good pricing."
"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."
"I'm not totally involved in the pricing part, but I think its pricing is quite aggressive, and its price is quite similar to Netskope. Netskope has separate licensing fees or additional charges if you want to monitor certain SaaS services, whereas, with MCAS, you get 5,000 applications with their Office 365. It is all bundled, and there's no cost for using that. You only have the operational costs. In the country I am in, it is a bit difficult to get people with the required skill sets."
"The product's pricing seems fair."
"The pricing is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions are best for your needs.
886,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
iboss can increase security in cyberspace. I have heard they are doing DDoS filtering, but I am not certain if they a...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
I use iboss for corporate VPN and all the corporate VRF, with basically all user traffic proxying to the internet.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
What do you like most about Forcepoint ONE?
The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint ONE?
The aspects of pricing, setup cost, and licensing are managed by our sales team, as I handle the technical side.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint ONE?
Forcepoint ONE could be improved in terms of scalability to better support hybrid environments, as many organizations...
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...
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...
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...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Bitglass
MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App Security
 

Overview

 

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.
UNC-Charlotte
Customers for Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps include Accenture, St. Luke’s University Health Network, Ansell, and Nakilat.
Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
886,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.