Forcepoint ONE vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps comparison

Forcepoint and Microsoft are both solutions in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category. Forcepoint is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.7, while Microsoft is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.5. Forcepoint holds a 1.9% mindshare in CASB, compared to Microsoft’s 6.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Forcepoint 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 Nov 7, 2024

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Forcepoint ONE are competing in the cloud security market. While Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is renowned for its seamless integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, providing robust compatibility and analytics, Forcepoint ONE holds an advantage with its comprehensive security features and intuitive use, making it a justifiable investment despite higher pricing.

Features: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers advanced threat detection, comprehensive analytics, and seamless integration with Microsoft 365. Forcepoint ONE focuses on data loss prevention, holistic threat protection across platforms, and an intuitive security model.

Room for Improvement: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps could enhance its cross-platform compatibility, reduce complexity in policy configuration, and improve user interface experience. Forcepoint ONE could benefit from a streamlined integration process, expanded customization for specific needs, and a reduction in resource consumption for smoother operation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is easily deployable within Microsoft environments, supported by robust customer service facilitating seamless transitions. Forcepoint ONE boasts a versatile deployment model suited for various infrastructures and offers dedicated customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a cost-effective solution for businesses already invested in Microsoft services, delivering strong ROI through ecosystem integration. Forcepoint ONE, while potentially more expensive initially, provides extensive security features that promise a worthwhile long-term investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,986 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 January 2026, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.5%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint ONE is 1.9%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 6.9%, down from 10.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps	6.9%
iboss	2.5%
Forcepoint ONE	1.9%
Other	88.7%

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851

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.

Read full review

reviewer2765397

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.

Read full review

Frank Van Der Spek

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.

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

"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

"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."

"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."

"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."

More iboss pros

"Forcepoint ONE is okay for me, and I find it a very good solution. Its most valuable feature is monitoring. Its monitoring is very good, and it can communicate with a SIEM system. I also find the DLP feature of Forcepoint ONE good."

"By default without a policy, Bitglass has the capability to notify the admin of multiple or simultaneous logins across a wide range of geographical regions."

"The most valuable features of Forcepoint include Zero Trust Network Access and remote user protection for private applications."

"The most valuable feature was the website blocking capability, which allowed me to quickly block any dodgy websites."

"We are able to verify what is getting saved out onto the cloud. It allows us to have some DLP rules, since we have to be HIPAA compliant. If some personal health information has been uploaded to Office 365, then we are able to detect that sort of thing and account for it. We have set up rules to prevent people from doing that."

"I have seen a return on investment, and the improvement is very good, with evident money saved because the license for Forcepoint ONE is a bundled package and noticeable time saved because more incidents are handled and reviewed in a short period of time with fewer employees since Forcepoint ONE does the work that I used to rely on a team of engineers to previously detect."

"The setup is relatively straightforward."

"The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules."

More Forcepoint ONE pros

"Defender for Cloud Apps has given us good visibility regarding what we've allowed into our environment until now."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is its monitoring."

"The product helps us with privileged identity management to control who has access to what and for how long."

"The ability to sanction unsanctioned apps using Secure Score benchmarking, included in Cloud, is also beneficial."

"Shadow IT discovery is the feature I like the most."

"The ability to prevent users from using certain applications is one of the most valuable features. It doesn't require any configuration for implementation from the client perspective. It just works right away and gives you the information you need."

"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is that we are primarily using only the Defender for Cloud on the Azure Cloud."

"The solution does not affect a user's workflow."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps pros

Cons

"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."

"Its pricing could be better."

"The reporting feature needs improvement."

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

"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."

"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."

"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."

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

More iboss cons

"We encounter challenges in determining whether certain features for blocking certain file types or preventing automatic downloads are functioning correctly."

"Areas for improvement for the platform include addressing scalability and architecture concerns, especially for large deployments involving more than 500 or 1,000 users."

"Integration into different multi-factor authentication tools. On their page, they tout Duo, but I don't use Duo. I use another vendor. Not that they don't interact, but it takes a little bit more doing. Any amount of efficiencies here would help."

"Forcepoint ONE can be improved in scalability to handle more hybrid environments."

"I believe that Forcepoint ONE could be improved when configuring certain policies; for content filtering, when trying to whitelist or blacklist certain domains, you can only do up to about 50 domains or URLs, which is a limitation that could be addressed."

"Initially, we had some challenges that Bitglass resolved quickly. The challenges were around communication. There didn't seem like there was the right level of communication within the Bitglass organization. Once we brought the issues up at a higher level, then they were resolved."

"There is room for improvement in making the reporting closer to real-time, ideally around five or ten minutes instead of half an hour. The interface could also be updated as it was quite dated."

"One area for improvement in Forcepoint ONE is that you'll need more training to install the solution yourself. I practiced in a laboratory and I needed more technical information to do the installation."

More Forcepoint ONE cons

"Defender could integrate better with multi-cloud and hybrid environments. It requires some additional configuration to ingest data from non-Azure environments and integrate it with Sentinel."

"We would like to get more information from the endpoint. I don't get enough detailed information right now on why something failed. There is not enough visibility."

"I would like more customization of notifications. Currently, you either get everything or you get limited information. I would like to have something in between where we can customize the data that is included in notifications."

"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."

"I would like for it to be available on Mac and for it to support all of the features of Microsoft financing products. It is really for Windows."

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

"The documentation could be improved as it is not updated immediately when Microsoft makes changes. Users must wait a few weeks for the changes to be reflected in the documentation."

"We are having trouble with our continuous reporting configuration and struggling with configuring the collector properly with our log parsing."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three."

"The price could be better and should be reconsidered."

"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."

"Our clients normally use the Microsoft E1 licensing, which is renewed yearly."

"Microsoft offers bundle discounts and a pay-as-you-go option."

"The product's pricing seems fair."

"We have an educational licensing agreement. It's a customer agreement for multiple years."

"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."

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

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

879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	10
Large Enterprise	19

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

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

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Forcepoint ONE?

Forcepoint ONE could be improved in terms of scalability to better support hybrid environments, as many organizations...

See all answers

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 do you like most about Microsoft Cloud App Security?

It does a great job of monitoring and maintaining a security baseline. For us, that is a key element. The notificatio...

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

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 14% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 11% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Netskope vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 11% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 9% of the time

Skyhigh Security vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 8% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 5% of the time

FortiSASE vs Forcepoint ONE

Compared 5% of the time

More Forcepoint ONE Competitors

Zscaler Internet Access vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 14% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 14% of the time

Netskope vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 10% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 2% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

January 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE

January 2026

Download Forcepoint ONE product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

December 2025

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps report

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

Bitglass

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

Forcepoint ONE is a comprehensive cybersecurity platform that provides organizations with a unified approach to protecting their critical data and assets. It offers a range of solutions that cover everything from network security and cloud security to data protection and insider threat prevention.

With Forcepoint ONE, organizations can gain complete visibility into their security posture, identify potential threats, and take proactive measures to mitigate risks.

One of the key features of Forcepoint ONE is its ability to provide real-time visibility into user behavior across all endpoints, networks, and cloud environments. This allows organizations to quickly identify and respond to potential threats, such as insider threats or malicious activity from external actors. Additionally, Forcepoint ONE offers advanced threat intelligence capabilities that leverage machine learning and AI to detect and respond to emerging threats. Another important aspect of Forcepoint ONE is its data protection capabilities.

The platform offers a range of solutions for protecting sensitive data, including data loss prevention (DLP), encryption, and secure web gateways. These solutions help organizations ensure that their critical data is protected both at rest and in transit, regardless of where it is stored or accessed.

Forcepoint ONE is a powerful cybersecurity platform that offers a comprehensive set of solutions for protecting organizations against a wide range of threats. With its advanced threat intelligence capabilities, real-time visibility into user behavior, and robust data protection features, Forcepoint ONE is an ideal choice for organizations looking to take a proactive approach to cybersecurity.

Forcepoint

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is a comprehensive security solution that provides protection for cloud-based applications and services. It offers real-time threat detection and response, as well as advanced analytics and reporting capabilities. With Defender for Cloud Apps, organizations can ensure the security of their cloud environments and safeguard against cyber threats. Whether you're running SaaS applications, IaaS workloads, or PaaS services, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps can help you secure your cloud environment and protect your business from cyber threats.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Benefits:

Provides comprehensive security for cloud applications
Integrates with other Microsoft security tools
Easy to use and deploy
Provides real-time threat detection and response
Strong protection against phishing attacks and other common threats
Highly customizable to meet specific needs of different organizations

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Use Cases:

Governance, authentication, security, and compliance.
Detects shadow IT and anomalous user behavior
Controls access to applications
Provides auditing and filtering setups
Used for end-user compute devices, file monitoring, user investigation, and activity
Used for data governance, threat detection, and getting visibility over cloud applications
Used to identify information about applications beyond organizational boundaries
Prevent exfiltration and data filtration of corporate data
Used to deal with spam emails and detect shadow IT

Reviews from Real Users

Ram-Krish, Cloud Security & Governance at a financial services firm, says that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need".

PeerSpot user, Senior Cloud & Security Consultant at a tech services, writes that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps "Great for monitoring user activity and protecting data while integrating well with other applications".

Simon Burgess,Infrastructure Engineer at SBITSC, states that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is "A fluid, intelligent product for great visibility, centralized management, and increased uptime".

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.

UNC-Charlotte

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

Buyer's Guide

Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

December 2025

Free Report: Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Forcepoint ONE 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.