Menlo Secure vs iboss comparison

Why PeerSpot?

iboss and Menlo Security are both solutions in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category. iboss is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.3, while Menlo Security is ranked #25. iboss holds a 3.2% mindshare in WSG, compared to Menlo Security’s 2.3% mindshare. Additionally, 96% of iboss users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Menlo Security users who would recommend it.

iboss

Read 26 iboss reviews

9,641 Views
4,917 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Menlo Secure

Read 5 Menlo Secure reviews

3,933 Views
2,517 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

iboss

Menlo Secure

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

Menlo Secure and iboss are competitors in the cybersecurity domain, specifically in the cloud-based secure web gateway sector. Menlo Secure takes the lead with its unique isolation technology that offers enhanced threat isolation, appealing to organizations focused on security. However, iboss may have an advantage due to its comprehensive feature set and versatile security capabilities.

Features: Menlo Secure excels with its cloud-based isolation technology, allowing secure browsing by executing web content in a cloud container, significantly reducing endpoint risk. Its email link rewriting feature ensures all links are accessed under Menlo protection. Comprehensive reporting capabilities provide valuable security insights. On the other hand, iboss offers an advanced threat detection system, network segmentation flexibility, and thorough SSL inspection, making it appealing to organizations requiring diverse security capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Menlo Secure could enhance its user activity logging to capture the current number of active users more effectively and address some persistent site isolation issues that require bypassing. Additionally, integrating more customization options for advanced threat response abilities would be beneficial. For iboss, there is potential to enhance reporting granularity and refine its user interface for better usability. Expanding its AI capabilities to detect emerging threats more efficiently and improving database connection inspections are areas for development.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Menlo Secure’s deployment is straightforward, leveraging a cloud-native architecture to ensure seamless integration into existing systems. Its customer service is responsive, although some features could be more intuitive. Iboss, with its cloud-first approach, offers customizable deployment options catering to different network architectures, and its customer service is highly regarded for tailored support, making it suitable for enterprises with complex needs.

Pricing and ROI: Menlo Secure offers a competitive pricing strategy aligning with its isolation technology benefits, providing effective ROI for businesses focusing on threat isolation. Iboss’s pricing may be higher due to its extensive feature set, yet it delivers significant ROI with its robust security infrastructure and customized deployment flexibility, potentially justifying the cost for businesses needing comprehensive security solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed Menlo Secure vs. iboss Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure vs. iboss

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 917,433 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

Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

6th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), ZTNA as a Service (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)

Menlo Secure

Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

25th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Firewalls (54th), ZTNA (27th), Cloud Security Remediation (6th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.2%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 2.3%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
iboss	3.2%
Menlo Secure	2.3%
Other	94.5%

Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.

Read full review

reviewer2701794

Head Of Bluechip Enterprise at a manufacturing company with 51-200 employees

Provides strong protection and multiple use cases but struggles with market recognition

There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto. Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco. What can be improved is market awareness and adoption of the technology. When selling it in the channel, regardless of how good the technology might be, success depends more on market adoption and awareness.

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

"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."

"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."

"I would say iboss is a very good product; its scalability is very good, and it's seamless for the user."

"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."

"iboss is definitely very good in terms of service."

"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."

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

"Deploying iboss leads to good return on investment, estimated around 70% to 80%."

More iboss pros

"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."

"We have definitely seen ROI, as we save a ton of money and time because the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools prior to implementing them had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged."

"Either you have access to something or don't have access to it, and if you do, we can ensure, 100 percent of the time, that there is nothing malicious that is going to impact our system in any way."

"We are not aware of a single compromise from the web since implementing the solution."

"The solution is invisible to our end users, so it doesn't have any impact on their work or performance."

"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."

"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."

"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."

More Menlo Secure pros

Cons

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."

"I would rate iboss an eight out of ten because it provides strong cloud-based security threat protection, centralized policy management, and visibility into web traffic. I would give it a higher rating if automation, reporting, and troubleshooting capabilities could be improved further."

"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."

"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."

"The dashboards for local use could be better."

"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."

"I have heard they are doing DDoS filtering, but I am not certain if they are implementing it correctly."

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."

More iboss cons

"Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco."

"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists."

"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."

"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."

"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."

"The user monitoring could still be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

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

"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."

"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."

"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."

"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

14%

Construction Company

11%

Outsourcing Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	14

No data available

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

I think iboss could be improved by emphasizing the modular function even more during sales presentations and demonstrations. The modular function is mentioned as part of the sales pitch for the dev...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

iboss is primarily used for content filtering within school districts and public K-12 school districts, and it can also be used as a firewall for antivirus, anti-spam, and related security function...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

My experience with iboss's pricing structure, setup cost, and licensing model has been positive, straightforward, and highly competitive compared to legacy network security vendors.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

People are mainly using it for zero trust web access. Menlo Secure is built from the ground up to provide zero basic access, and by doing it that way, it has multiple use cases. For example, it man...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

Secure file sharing and data protection is not exactly what Menlo Secure is designed to do. While it can handle some of these functions, people typically choose another technology for those specifi...

See all answers

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Prisma Access Browser vs Menlo Secure

Compared 12% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Menlo Secure

Compared 11% of the time

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs Menlo Secure

Compared 10% of the time

Cloudflare One vs Menlo Secure

Compared 9% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Menlo Secure

Compared 3% of the time

More Menlo Secure Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

October 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure

October 2026

Download Menlo Secure product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security

Overview

iboss is the Zero Trust SASE platform that gives organizations complete visibility and governance over their AI, data, and applications through one unified platform, one console, one policy engine, and one data lake.

Your endpoints may already stop malware. Your data and application activity can still be invisible. iboss decrypts and understands every connection, then turns that signal into answers security leaders can act on.

The platform leads with three capabilities in this order: AI Security and Visibility, Data Security and Visibility, and App Visibility and Control. Zero Trust Network Access, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN sit underneath as the access fabric that carries those three. Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

- AI Security and Visibility: conversation capture, shadow-AI discovery, AI DLP, and agent governance across Claude, Co-Work, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok, and emerging services.

- Data Security and Visibility: full SSL/TLS decryption, deep content inspection, MIP label compliance, and one-click compliance reporting.

- App Visibility and Control: signatureless CASB, dual risk scoring, in-app controls, and SSPM for major SaaS.

- Containerized Zero Trust SASE: dedicated containers, isolated SSL keys, one console, one policy engine, one data lake.

- Access fabric: ZTNA, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN under the same platform.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

- Complete visibility over AI, data, and applications from one platform instead of separate point tools.

- Encrypted traffic is inspected by default so data decisions use content and context together.

- Shadow SaaS and new web tools appear as they are used, with enforceable controls in one console.

- Native data sovereignty through dedicated containers, in-region inspection, and per-customer SSL key custody.

- Scale proven in published materials: 10M+ users, 100+ countries, 150B+ transactions, 2.5B+ threats blocked.

Economic buyers are CISOs, CIOs, and VPs of Security. Champions include security architects, network and infrastructure leaders, SecOps, and GRC. Primary segments: enterprise and business, financial services, government (including FedRAMP Gov Cloud), healthcare, manufacturing, legal and professional services, retail and hospitality, and MSP/MSSP partners. Education, including K-12, is one vertical among these.

iboss

Menlo Security Secure Application Access

Menlo Security Secure Application Access makes zero trust access easy, giving users secure connectivity to private applications, including web and legacy applications. At the core of Secure Application Access is the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser, which fetches, secures and delivers the content for users.

In addition to providing simple-to-deploy, clientless ZTA, Secure Application Access and the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser protect applications from attacks such as session hijacking, cookie manipulation, and other tactics that employ protocol manipulation.

Secure Application Access protects applications from Internet threats and provides granular controls for added protection of the application and associated data. These security controls include Read-only/Read-write, Upload/download, Copy/paste, AV scanning, Sandboxing, and Data Loss Prevention.

Last Mile Data Protection

Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection identifies and prevents sensitive data from leaving your company by meticulously inspecting all file uploads and user input across browsing sessions. Leveraging the Secure Cloud Browser, users are protected from the internet and you can protect your organization from data loss with comprehensive traffic monitoring and controls. This approach addresses the growing concerns surrounding data leakage in the age of AI tools like ChatGPT.

By identifying sensitive data through file types, regular expressions, or predefined libraries, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection empowers security teams to regulate data input into AI platforms and prevent unauthorized uploads. This capability provides crucial protection for intellectual property, PII, and other confidential information.

The solution leverages the Menlo Cloud Security Platform's visibility and control over traffic to reliably detect and prevent data leaks originating from both browser submission forms and non-browser traffic. With the ability to inspect encrypted web traffic, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection enforces DLP policies consistently across all users and devices, ensuring comprehensive data protection.

Menlo Security

Sample Customers

Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure vs. iboss

September 2026

Free Report: Menlo Secure vs. iboss

Find out what your peers are saying about Menlo Secure vs. iboss and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Menlo Secure vs. iboss report.

See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.

We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.