We performed a comparison between Cato SASE Cloud Platform and Qualys VMDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Cisco, Zscaler and others in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)."The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The solution is stable."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The visibility control and security aspects are amazing."
"It's a pretty straightforward solution."
"When I first encountered Cato, I didn't know how to use it, but after a week of training, I could onboard our systems to it, so the solution was easy to learn and navigate."
"The most valuable feature of Cato Networks is the CASB and the documentation is useful."
"The scalability is quite good."
"The most valuable features of Cato Networks are the always-on VPN for remote workers and centralized management. Additionally, web filtering and antivirus are good."
"The solution is a simple WAN solution. We've onboarded the socket on the Cato platform, and it provides connectivity. There is no complex routing."
"The product is efficient and easy to use."
"What I like about Qualys VM is the dashboard presentation. It's very good."
"The integrations for this solution are very good. I use a different product for virtual patching of vulnerabilities and Qualys integrates well with that product."
"We also like the flexibility in their licensing."
"The most valuable features are vulnerability detection and the scanning capability to enable identification of vulnerabilities across our network."
"The most valuable feature is that this solution is very lightweight."
"I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagging system is good for tagging. We can still use QualysAgent task ID tools even if tags aren't made."
"The process of defining and discovering scans is organized efficiently."
"It is quite easy to implement."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"The product may be complex for users with few years of experience."
"The tool needs to be more granular. Its reports are not very in-depth."
"Web application firewalling (WAF) is a feature we would like to have in this solution and does not exist yet."
"They should add more sophisticated security features. It should also be integrated into the cloud."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is not cheap."
"We face issues while scanning multiple assets."
"It is a struggle to be able to pull our report and to be able to do onboarding using automated tools."
"There needs to be better documentation."
"The reporting and dashboards could improve in Qualys VM. However, they have improved since the previous versions."
"It is more expensive vs. other products on the market."
"The solution is a bit expensive if you do not have access to discounts."
"I would like to have CSPM, a continuous scan-like cloud added to the solution."
"It's quite complex on the way it is set up, so it takes a fair bit of time in order to get your head around it in order to deploy it. Once you've deployed it, then you're never confident on the versions of the browsers and the SSL certificates, etc. You have to always go back into Qualys and check."
Cato SASE Cloud Platform is ranked 5th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 21 reviews while Qualys VMDR is ranked 3rd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 77 reviews. Cato SASE Cloud Platform is rated 8.8, while Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cato SASE Cloud Platform writes "Useful remote worker VPN, centralized management, and simple on-boarding process". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Cato SASE Cloud Platform is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cisco SD-WAN, Fortinet FortiGate and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.