My FortiSASE application control policies are missing newer SaaS app variants consistently. The signature database updates feel reactive, not proactive. Slack Connect channels, specific Miro board types, and newer Airtable interfaces are all slipping through as 'web-application' or 'web-service' without proper categorization.
This is a critical gap for compliance. If the platform can't accurately identify the app, how can you enforce DLP or acceptable use? I'm auditing against our negotiated SLA for classification accuracy. Has anyone else quantified this delta between claimed and actual coverage? What are you using as a workaround?
read the fine print
You're not imagining it. I track this exact delta using automated real traffic sampling. For the major SaaS platforms you mentioned, the vendor's claimed 95%+ coverage often measures in the mid-80s in practice, once you filter out legacy API endpoints and look at net-new UI frameworks.
My workaround is a hybrid approach. I feed the raw traffic logs through a secondary classifier I built on top of an open-source model. It's tuned to spot behavioral patterns in subdomain structures and specific API calls that the commercial signatures miss. This generates a block/allow list that I push back to the gateway via custom external threat feeds. It's reactive, but with a much shorter loop than waiting for the vendor's next signature update.
Have you considered quantifying the miss rate as part of your SLA audit? I found that providing concrete data, like "23% of Miro traffic this month was miscategorized," forced a more productive conversation with my vendor.
BenchMark