SASECompare
Home/Comparisons/IoT/OT Device Security

IoT/OT Device Security

LIVE

Can the platform discover, classify, and secure IoT and OT devices?

85%+ of enterprises have more smart edge devices than traditional endpoints. IoT/OT devices can't run agents, creating a massive blind spot. We tested 5 critical IoT/OT security capabilities across all 8 SASE vendors.

5checks
8vendors
Information sourced from publicly available documentation. Vendor capabilities change frequently. Always verify with the vendor before making purchasing decisions. Not affiliated with any vendor. See our terms & disclaimer. Vendors: to report inaccuracies, email info@sasecompare.com.
Cato Networks
Cato

4/5

Check Point
Check Point

5/5

Cisco
Cisco

5/5

Cloudflare
Cloudflare

1/5

Fortinet
Fortinet

5/5

Netskope
Netskope

4/5

Palo Alto Networks
Palo Alto

5/5

Zscaler
Zscaler

4/5

YESSupported
PARTIALLimited
NONot supported
TBDResearch pending
01

Automatic IoT/OT device discovery?

02

Zero-trust microsegmentation for IoT?

03

Device behavioral baselining?

04

Agentless policy enforcement?

05

Industrial protocol awareness?

Share
Did we get something wrong?Let us know

Need this analysis tailored to your environment?

Get a custom report with deeper analysis, weighted scoring based on your priorities, and vendor recommendations specific to your deployment.

Request Custom Report

Get notified when we publish new comparisons

No spam. Just new research drops and major updates.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which SASE vendor is best for iot/ot device security?
Based on 5 checks across 8 vendors, Check Point and Cisco and Fortinet and Palo Alto Networks lead with 5 out of 5 capabilities fully supported (YES). Cloudflare scored lowest with 1 YES answers. Results are based on publicly available documentation. Always verify with the vendor before purchasing.
Does it support protocol-aware inspection for industrial protocols (Modbus, BACnet, OPC-UA)?
Check Point, Cisco, Fortinet, Palo Alto Networks fully support this. Cato Networks, Netskope, Zscaler offer partial support. Cloudflare does not support this. Generic network inspection can't understand SCADA commands. Protocol-aware inspection catches malicious OT commands that look like normal traffic
Does the platform automatically discover and classify IoT/OT devices on the network without manual inventory?
Cato Networks, Check Point, Cisco, Fortinet, Netskope, Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler fully support this. Cloudflare offers partial support. You can't secure thousands of cameras, printers, and sensors if you don't even know they're on the network
Can it enforce zero-trust microsegmentation policies for IoT/OT device communication?
Cato Networks, Check Point, Cisco, Fortinet, Netskope, Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler fully support this. Cloudflare offers partial support. A compromised camera shouldn't be able to reach the database server. Without microsegmentation, IoT devices are lateral movement highways
Does it provide device fingerprinting and behavioral baselining for anomaly detection?
Cato Networks, Check Point, Cisco, Fortinet, Netskope, Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler fully support this. Cloudflare does not support this. An HVAC controller suddenly scanning the network is a compromise indicator. Behavioral baselines catch anomalies that signatures miss
Can the platform enforce security policies without requiring agents on IoT/OT devices?
Cato Networks, Check Point, Cisco, Cloudflare, Fortinet, Netskope, Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler fully support this. You can't install an agent on a security camera or industrial PLC. Agentless enforcement is the only option for IoT/OT
How is the IoT/OT Device Security comparison tested?
We test 5 specific scenarios across Cato Networks, Check Point, Cisco, Cloudflare, Fortinet, Netskope, Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler. All answers are sourced from publicly available vendor documentation, knowledge base articles, and verified user reports. YES means confirmed working with documentation, PARTIAL means it works with significant limitations, NO means confirmed not supported.

Methodology

All answers are sourced from publicly available vendor documentation, knowledge base articles, press releases, and verified user reports. We do not rely on vendor marketing claims.

YES means the feature is confirmed working with documentation. PARTIAL means it works with significant caveats or limitations. NO means it is confirmed not supported. TBD means research is still in progress.

Click any cell in the matrix to see the detailed evidence and source link.

Feedback

Help me make this better

This is a one-person project. Your input directly shapes what gets added, fixed, or prioritized next.