Side by side · No scores
Cato Networks and Fortinet: GenAI security controls side by side
In short
Cato Networks and Fortinet both state finds shadow AI use, inspects prompts for sensitive data, controls AI agent and MCP traffic, protects homegrown AI apps at runtime, blocks inline in real time and has a watch or log-only action. Cato Networks states covers coding agents, redacts or anonymizes data in prompts, lists security attestations and one console for AI and network policy, while Fortinet states coaches or warns the user and can run on your own infrastructure. This page compares published facts only; it does not pick a side.
By The Inline Desk · GenAI Security Finder · Published 2026-10-26
Desk research from the six vendors' own public pages, read on 7 October 2026. Profiles follow our published method; we did not run the products.
- SSE · Security cloud (SASE or SSE)
- AIG · AI gateway and guardrails
- FWG · Firewall or self-hosted gateway
- Cato Networks: filled square where described
- Fortinet: dashed outline where described
- Filled square: described on the vendor pages we read
- Hatched square: partly described (a narrower scope, or the enforcement point is not stated)
- Dashed square: not in our sources (it may exist; we did not find it)
Check by check
| Check | Cato Networks | Fortinet | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finds shadow AI use | Stated Discovers shadow AI and coding agents across endpoints and auto-inventories every third-party AI tool, copilot and agent. Source: Cato Networks: AI security for end users · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Stated Discovers AI applications in use with their categories, use cases, risk levels and log details. Source: Fortinet: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Same status |
| Inspects prompts for sensitive data | Stated Stops data leaks in prompts, with Monitor, Anonymize and Block as policy actions. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Stated FortiAIGate checks prompts and outputs before they reach users or systems and is described as stopping data leaks. Source: Fortinet: FortiAIGate · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Same status |
| Controls AI agent and MCP traffic | Stated Maps agents, MCP servers and skills, and inspects agent prompts, responses and tool calls. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Stated Checks agent tool calls and catches prompt injection, jailbreaks and data leaks in MCP tool traffic. Source: Fortinet: FortiAIGate · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Same status |
| Covers coding agents | Stated Names enforcement for Claude Code, Cursor and Codex and stops risky coding-agent tool calls before they run. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Not in our sources | Cato Networks states it |
| Protects homegrown AI apps at runtime | Stated Blocks prompt injection and jailbreaks and red teams homegrown AI apps. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Stated Guardrails check text, images, audio, video and code, and catch prompt injection and jailbreaks. Source: Fortinet: FortiAIGate · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Same status |
| Blocks inline in real time | Stated Checks every interaction inline, with fast checks in milliseconds; Block is one of three policy actions. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Stated FortiAI blocks unauthorized prompts; FortiAIGate is described as stopping harmful AI content in real time. Source: Fortinet: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Same status |
| Coaches or warns the user | Not in our sources | Stated User coaching drives correct behavior and captures artifacts for intent investigation. Source: Fortinet: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Fortinet states it |
| Has a watch or log-only action | Stated Monitor is one of three policy actions. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Stated Apply guardrails, monitor activity and adjust policies in real time. Source: Fortinet: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Same status |
| Redacts or anonymizes data in prompts | Stated Anonymize is a policy action; Cato states it redacts sensitive data inline. Source: Cato Networks: AI security for end users · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Not in our sources | Cato Networks states it |
| Can run on your own infrastructure | Partly stated On-prem protection with Outposts is described for homegrown AI apps, not for employee AI use. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Stated With self-hosting, data and logs stay on your infrastructure; FortiSASE also has a Sovereign option deployed in the customer's own data centres. Source: Fortinet: FortiAIGate · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Fortinet states it |
| States FedRAMP | Not in our sources | Not in our sources | Same status |
| Lists security attestations | Stated Lists SOC 2 and SOC 3, PCI-DSS Level 1 Service Provider, ISO/IEC 27001, 27017, 27018 and 27701, CSA STAR Self-Assessment, UK Cyber Essentials and Spain ENS High. Source: Cato Networks: security, compliance and privacy · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Partly stated The trust page states alignment with the ISO/IEC 27000 series and NIST 800-53; specific certifications for FortiSASE are not stated in the text we read. Source: Fortinet: trust · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Cato Networks states it |
| One console for AI and network policy | Stated Cato states one AI-native engine and one console cover users, applications and agents. Source: Cato Networks: AI security · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Partly stated Unified SASE is built on a single OS, policy engine and management plane; FortiAIGate is described as a separate control point. Source: Fortinet: Unified SASE · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Cato Networks states it |
Approaches
- SSE
AI controls in a SASE or SSE cloud
Cato NetworksDescribed
FortinetPartly described
- AIG
Standalone AI security layer
Cato NetworksDescribed
FortinetDescribed
- FWG
Firewall or self-hosted AI gateway
Cato NetworksPartly described
FortinetDescribed
- Filled square: described on the vendor pages we read
- Hatched square: partly described (a narrower scope, or the enforcement point is not stated)
- Dashed square: not in our sources (it may exist; we did not find it)
Responses
Cato Networks
Cato Networks states Watch, Redact and Block; Coach is not in our sources.
Fortinet
Fortinet states Watch, Coach and Block; Redact is not in our sources.
Network and compliance in each vendor's words
| Fact | Cato Networks | Fortinet |
|---|---|---|
| Network | A cloud-native, private global backbone spanning 100+ PoPs worldwide, with a 99.999% uptime SLA. The SLA terms are not on the page. Source: Cato Networks: global private backbone · Read 7 Oct 2026 | A global network of 200+ PoPs on Fortinet-owned infrastructure, extended through integration with AWS, Google Cloud and Oracle Cloud. Source: Fortinet: FortiSASE · Read 7 Oct 2026 |
| Compliance | SOC 2 and SOC 3, PCI-DSS Level 1 Service Provider, ISO/IEC 27001, 27017, 27018, 27701 and 14001, UK Cyber Essentials, CSA STAR Self-Assessment, GDPR and Spain ENS High. FedRAMP is not listed on the page. Source: Cato Networks: security, compliance and privacy · Read 7 Oct 2026 | PSIRT disclosure aligned with ISO/IEC 30111 and 29147; security aligned with the ISO/IEC 27000 series and NIST 800-53. FortiSASE certifications such as SOC 2 or FedRAMP are not stated in the text we read. Source: Fortinet: trust · Read 7 Oct 2026 |
| Analyst placement | Named a Leader in the 2026 Gartner Magic Quadrant for SASE Platforms for the third consecutive year (Gartner, Magic Quadrant for SASE Platforms, 28 July 2026). Source: Cato Networks news: Leader in the 2026 Gartner Magic Quadrant for SASE Platforms · Read 7 Oct 2026 | Recognized as a Challenger in the 2026 Gartner Magic Quadrant for SASE Platforms. Source: Fortinet: FortiSASE · Read 7 Oct 2026 |
Which might suit you?
Look at Cato Networks if you want employee AI controls, agent controls and network security under one policy and one console, or if you want to redact sensitive data in prompts inline rather than only allow or block.
Look at Fortinet if AI traffic, data and logs must stay on infrastructure you run, or if you already run FortiGate firewalls and want AI controls from the same family.
In the quiz
| Profile | Cato Networks | Fortinet |
|---|---|---|
| Shadow AI and prompt data, SASE in place, block inline | First group | Later |
| Agents and coding tools at scale, redact rather than block | First group | Later |
| Shadow AI and prompt data, coach people first | Same fit as Fortinet · Equal fit | Same fit as Cato Networks · Equal fit |
| US federal supplier that needs FedRAMP | First group | Later |
| Homegrown AI apps on a firewall estate, self-hosted | Later | First group |
| Teams building AI apps, choosing network security now | First group | Later |
| Zscaler customer coaching first, large estate | Later | Later |
| Under 1,000 people, watching shadow AI first | First group | Later |
Limits to check
Cato Networks
- FedRAMP is not listed on Cato's compliance page, which matters for US federal buyers.
- User coaching (warn, then let the person continue) is not described; the stated actions are Monitor, Anonymize and Block.
- Self-hosted enforcement is described only for homegrown AI apps (Outposts), not for employee AI use, and Cato publishes no count of the AI apps it recognises.
Fortinet
- Which enforcement point delivers employee AI controls (FortiSASE, a FortiGate or FortiAIGate) is not stated on the pages we read.
- Compliance certifications for FortiSASE, including FedRAMP, are not stated in the trust page text we read.
- Named coding agents are not described.
Questions
Which states more checks, Cato Networks or Fortinet?
Cato Networks states 10 of 13 checks and Fortinet states 8, on the pages we read. A count is not a quality measure: check the ones your answers make matter in the quiz.
Do Cato Networks and Fortinet publish prices?
Neither publishes prices on the pages we read.
Which one covers MCP and agent traffic?
Cato Networks: Stated. Maps agents, MCP servers and skills, and inspects agent prompts, responses and tool calls. Fortinet: Stated. Checks agent tool calls and catches prompt injection, jailbreaks and data leaks in MCP tool traffic.