Jamf Connect vs Netskope Private Access comparison

JAMF and Netskope are both solutions in the ZTNA as a Service category. JAMF is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0, while Netskope is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.5. JAMF holds a 1.8% mindshare in ZaaS, compared to Netskope’s 4.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of JAMF users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Netskope users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 19, 2025

Jamf Connect and Netskope Private Access operate in the domains of identity management and secure remote access, respectively. Jamf Connect stands out for organizations centered around Apple products, offering seamless identity management, while Netskope Private Access excels by providing robust security features.

Features: Jamf Connect streamlines macOS device authentication with its single sign-on capabilities and supports integrations with identity providers like Azure AD and Okta. It offers password synchronization and account provisioning, simplifying user management across devices. Netskope Private Access provides zero-trust security, application-based access control, and robust data protection measures such as DLP and browser filtering, ensuring secure and seamless access to private applications.

Room for Improvement: Jamf Connect could enhance support for multi-factor authentication and provide more comprehensive pre-stage enrollment options for MDM-capable users. The product would benefit from greater flexibility in deploying user-level configuration profiles and improved documentation covering advanced use cases. Netskope Private Access may require simplification in policy management and user interface to enhance usability. Addressing initial setup complexity for security policies and improving latency for users on high-bandwidth connections could further optimize its performance.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Jamf Connect offers intuitive deployment for Apple infrastructure users, coupled with efficient customer service to assist in seamless transitions. Netskope Private Access, while requiring a more complex initial setup for security policy implementation, provides comprehensive support to ensure successful deployment, accommodating organizations with stringent security requirements.

Pricing and ROI: Jamf Connect presents a cost-effective setup for Apple-focused organizations with a swift ROI due to its integration capabilities. Netskope Private Access involves higher initial costs, justified by its extensive security features and yielding higher long-term ROI for enterprises prioritizing security. The pricing differences reflect their respective focuses on cost-effectiveness for Apple ecosystems and strategic security investments.

To learn more, read our detailed Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 880,901 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

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.6%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Jamf Connect is 1.8%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 4.2%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

ZTNA as a Service Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
iboss	2.6%
Netskope Private Access	4.2%
Jamf Connect	1.8%
Other	91.4%

ZTNA as a Service

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851

Managing Director

Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment

I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.

Read full review

Joost Van 'T Wout

Senior Endpoint Engineer (macOS/Jamf) at PVH Corp.

Customizable and good password management but needs better user-level profile deployment

The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However, due to some limitations with the enrollment sequence and user limitations, we decided to discontinue using it We previously used Jamf Connect to synchronize local accounts with…

Read full review

Prathamesh Samant

Presales Manager at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

Has ensured secure remote access through real-time device checks and policy controls

There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support, it is quite easy to integrate. Wherever customization is needed, it depends on the openness of the application being integrated with. If the other application has an open architecture where you have easy API integrations, then it becomes easier. However, in some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope. They can introduce the DLP feature for Netskope Private Access. Zscaler has that DLP feature. It is in their roadmap, but currently, they don't have it. If they have data protection or data loss prevention within their NPA, that would be a significant advantage.

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

"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."

"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

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

"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."

"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."

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."

"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."

More iboss pros

"The initial setup of Jamf Connect was straightforward with clear instructions provided in the documentation."

"The solution is scalable."

"Jamf Connect allowed us to fully customize everything, offering a branded way to change passwords and manage integration with Entra instead of LDAP."

"It is easy to integrate into any existing IT workflow."

"The most valuable feature is ease of access. It's convenient to do things like resetting passwords. Previously, users were bound to their domain. We had to bind the user to the domain and log them in through the AD. Now, using Jamf Connect, we don't face any of these challenges. Resetting passwords is hassle-free so we can regularly rotate passwords according to best practices."

"The tool supports different types of authentication. It also integrates seamlessly if you are using other Jamf products."

"It's a good and stable tool, so you should use it if you have a need."

"Jamf Connect is a pretty simple and straightforward tool overall."

More Jamf Connect pros

"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."

"In the firewall, we don't have a user-based policies list, and we can't create them. Netskope helps us to create user-based policies. For example, if there are specific teams like HR or more than nine teams, and we want logs from access over particular URLs, and we don't want to allow that specific URL for certain users, we can create these policies in Netskope. It's handy, easy to use for new users, and has a cool GUI interface. We can create multiple policies, and as for the proxy, it's a leading solution."

"Netskope Private Access covers a wide range of use cases with solutions for client-server and server-to-client connectivity patterns."

"It is a stable solution."

"The most valuable feature is being able to see who is accessing the application, whether it is a managed device or a bring-your-own-device published by Netskope."

"The main benefit for users from Netskope Private Access would be secure access from anywhere; they can easily access their systems or applications in their office premises or on-premises environment in a very secure way and the organization can also be assured knowing that whatever access they have been providing to their remote users goes through proper checks and balances before access is provided."

"In the VPN scenario, what was happening, the user would get back to the complete source. But in NPA, the application will go to the user. There is an outbound connection. There is no inbound. Storage providers are also not there. It's the best feature because it is the replacement of the VPN."

"The initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."

More Netskope Private Access pros

Cons

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

"The dashboards for local use could be better."

"The reporting feature needs improvement."

"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."

"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."

"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."

"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."

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

More iboss cons

"There is room for improvement with Jamf Connect in reducing its cost and overcoming limitations during pre-stage enrollment, which prevent it from creating MDM-capable users."

"The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However, due to some limitations with the enrollment sequence and user limitations, we decided to discontinue using it."

"The solution’s technical support is bad and should be improved."

"When a Mac is joined to Azure, the generic Pro console in the MDM should accurately display the Mac as joined to Azure in the inventory section. Currently, it shows "no domain account found," which can be misleading."

"The configuration could be faster."

"Jamf Connect is beginning to implement Multi-Factor Authentication for offline authentication, but the setup documentation is insufficient."

"Jamf's support could be improved."

"Overall, there is a lack of consistent experience sometimes with some of their features."

More Jamf Connect cons

"The cost has room for improvement."

"The solution needs to develop faster features. Its interoperability feature is not working. It takes six months to one year for any product to implement the improvements. However, the process should be faster to implement the changes quickly."

"I would like to see them go down the path of including SD-WAN. Currently, they don't do SD-WAN. If they could somehow natively do that inside of the platform, that would be amazing. I don't know if they're going to do it, but it would be amazing if they do."

"In some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope."

"Netskope Private Access allows mapping only one DNS server. If a user uses a secondary DNS on-premises, Netskope fails to disconnect them. This is an issue that needs to be addressed."

"The ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."

"The major problem that we are facing is if we deploy Netskope on the server level or if we get a new server in the EMEA factor, it will affect all the machines. Recently, this has caused us to fail some reviews."

"The product is not easy to use."

More Netskope Private Access cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"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."

"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 expensive compared to one of its competitors."

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

"The pricing is good."

"Jamf Connect has a yearly licensing cost, which is expensive."

"We pay 2 dollars per device monthly. For the plus version, you have to pay 4 dollars per month. I think the product will give discounts based on the number of users and devices."

"I rate the cost as three out of ten, with ten being the highest."

"The pricing model could be improved, especially considering the availability of alternative MDM solutions like Kandji, which offers similar features for free or at a lower cost."

"The solution's price is reasonable."

"It's relatively inexpensive."

"The pricing is definitely on the higher side."

"It is not the most expensive option, being more affordable than Zscaler, but it's also not the most budget-friendly choice available."

"The pricing of the solution is cheap."

"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."

"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."

"It is significantly cost-effective compared to its contenders."

"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."

"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."

"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."

More Netskope Private Access pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

880,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Insurance Company

Healthcare Company

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	9

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Jamf Connect?

Jamf Connect requires a per-device license fee, which becomes quite expensive given our large company size. Each devi...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Jamf Connect?

There is room for improvement with Jamf Connect in reducing its cost and overcoming limitations during pre-stage enro...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Jamf Connect?

The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However,...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Netskope Private Access?

There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Netskope Private Access?

For secure remote access for people who are working out of the office, remotely, or traveling, my clients mostly use ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Private Access?

I work with a system integrator, and nowadays, we have all these solutions in our portfolio for our customers. At tha...

See all answers

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 14% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 11% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Okta Platform vs Jamf Connect

Compared 20% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Jamf Connect

Compared 12% of the time

Lookout vs Jamf Connect

Compared 7% of the time

Zimperium vs Jamf Connect

Compared 7% of the time

Workspace ONE UEM vs Jamf Connect

Compared 7% of the time

More Jamf Connect Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 35% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 14% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 14% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 9% of the time

JumpCloud vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 3% of the time

More Netskope Private Access Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

January 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Jamf Connect

January 2026

Download Jamf Connect product report

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access

January 2026

Download Netskope Private Access product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

Wandera, Wandera Private Access

No data available

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Wandera Threat Defense helps businesses ensure a productive workforce, by defending both managed and unmanaged devices against the full spectrum of mobile threats. The solution includes security protections on the device and in the network, allowing for effective and targeted policy actions against even the most sophisticated attacks. Wandera Threat Defense is powered by MI:RIAM, a leading threat intelligence engine that learns in real-time through signals from 425 million sensors around the globe.

JAMF

Netskope Private Access is an integral component of the Netskope Security Cloud platform that provides zero-trust secure access to enterprise applications and data in hybrid IT (public cloud and data center) environments. It offers comprehensive policy management, compliance assessment, and supports any application, protocol, and device to reduce risk and simplify security operations.

Netskope

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.

Mastercard, Deloitte, PayPal, Toshiba, BNP Paribas, EY, Otis, Rollins, Eurostar, Frontier, Sealy, Rolex, VITAS Healthcare

Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy

Buyer's Guide

Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access

December 2025

Free Report: Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access

Find out what your peers are saying about Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

880,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access report.

See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors.

We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.