Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

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
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (3rd), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), ZTNA as a Service (11th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (10th)
Netskope Next Gen Secure We...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
12th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (5th), ZTNA as a Service (2nd), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.0%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is 2.2%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 11.2%, up from 9.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. 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. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Manish Dave - PeerSpot reviewer
Offer capability to create policy groups aligned with specific requirements for users, groups, and locations
There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. If I compare it with other products, the groups and are a little different in Netgroup. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow. So initially, when doing a pilot, at that time, it takes a lot of time to streamline the policies. So that is one thing they can work on. It should be easy to edit and easy to deploy. The only thing is now, as part of the NexGen SWG, in the same IPU currently, the KATB and UBA portion is very limited. So maybe Netskope can extend it in future releases. That is point number one. Point number two, integration with any DLP solution should be very seamless, irrespective of the brand or make of the DLP. Netskope was also to come up with the endpoint DLP, which was expected in Q4 last year but which is still not out. So, that is the reason why we had to go with a separate DLP. If everything were available in one SKU, we would not have to search outside for the business solution. So maybe Netskope can work on all four mediums of DLP, which are the endpoint, the network, email, and the web. All four mediums should be covered as part of the DLP solution.
Partha Dash - PeerSpot reviewer
Makes us part of a bigger security ecosystem with updates taken care of for us, but pricing and support need work
There are definitely a number of things that could be improved. One of them is geographic coverage. China is still an issue because the solution does not operate there properly due to government regulations. I believe Palo Alto is trying pretty hard to get into partnerships with Alibaba and other cloud providers, but they do not have the same compelling offering in China that they have in the rest of the world. Businesses that are operating within China have to be very sure to evaluate the solution before making a buying decision. It is not an issue with Palo Alto, rather it is predominantly the result of government rules, but it's something that Palo Alto needs to work on. There is also room for improvement when it comes to latency in a couple of regions, including India and South America. They might have to increase their presence in those locations and come up with more modern cloud architectures. The third area is that, while Palo Alto has understood the essence of building capabilities around cloud technology and have come up with a CASB offering, that is a very new product. There are other companies that have better offerings for understanding cloud applications and have more graceful controls. That's something that Palo Alto needs to work on.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"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."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is that everything is on the cloud. It has no on-premise hardware to deal with."
"Web filtering and DLP are good features."
"It is for secure web trafficking, and it is doing what it needs to do. It allows customers to consolidate and eliminate multiple technologies onto Netskope and just kind of turn the dial and use more features, such as CASB, VPN. SWG is another feature. You can monitor and govern all the traffic."
"As Netskope is a cloud-based application, it is possible to analyze and distinguish personal and enterprise instances."
"There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are already relevant to any industry. So grouping the policies is the easiest part and a valuable feature."
"We've found the solution to be quite stable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its three modules, which are SWG, ZTNA, and CASB."
"We can connect cloud apps and monitor them."
"Prisma's most valuable feature would be its ability to identify bad or risky configurations."
"It's very stable. Sometimes after installing the boxes, we leave them for one or two years. We would just touch the box in the case of the customer needing new requirements or changes to the setup."
"The overall rating for GlobalProtect is nine out of ten."
"The tool's consolidation is pretty quick."
"The protection for web-based applications was helpful for my colleagues who didn't want a particular application on their devices. And the non-web access protection was more for our developers because they were writing and building code on their computers. Prisma Access was able to protect them."
"It's much faster and more secure than legacy solutions. It is also quite stable and scalable as well. We are able to see all the traffic in one place."
"The most valuable features are ZTNA 2.0, CASB, Threat Prevention, and Autonomous Digital Experience Management (ADAM)."
"We have an application called ADEM that helps us troubleshoot network-related issues. It helps us to isolate an issue whether it is on the ISP level, endpoint level, or system access level."
 

Cons

"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"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."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."
"The solution could improve the features for Zero Trust Network Access. They should add more security components to that module."
"Since they have the Netskope client, adding some functionality in the endpoint would be good."
"Cost competitiveness is its area of improvement. They will have to figure out how can they strategically price it because there are a few players in the game who have been doing it for a long time. They will have to figure out how to go to market on the pricing."
"There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow."
"They should work on marketing material to put out their work with a little more effort."
"Improvement in the solution is required in certain areas where the product does not provide access to its direct end users, who use the portal as an administrator."
"Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats."
"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."
"I would like the solution to support a different type of authentication. We can't configure a secondary method for our portal."
"When it comes to the VPN, it uses the global protect VPN functionality to connect remotely, but it has a feature limitation for assigning multiple IP sub-links to different user groups. It would be much better if we are able to assign the current IP blocks for the sub-links based on the user groups."
"The product's current price is an area of shortcoming where improvements are required."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required. The solution's price should be lowered."
"They could add more flexibility and improve product performance."
"The cloud setup is straightforward, and the onboarding process is much better, but the on-premises initial setup is slightly complex."
"My clients would like to see a more feature-rich product."
"From any improvement perspective, the product's compatibility issues with Linux need to be resolved."
 

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."
"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."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"The product is cheap."
"The solution's overall cost is cheaper than regular web security solutions."
"We pay a licensing fee of $10,000 on a yearly basis."
"The license model is based on the number of users. You have the possibility to have 10,000 users if you wish."
"The price is average. Because the license is user-based, you can increase it as per the user quantity."
"I'm still comparing, but the solution is quite expensive."
"Compared to other products, the price is slightly high."
"It is not cheap. It is expensive. The good thing is that you are able to pay for what you need, but overall, it is not cheap. The pricing is not based on packages. You pay based on the features. If you want DLP, you only pay for DLP. They are very flexible. It is not cheap, but the licensing is flexible. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"It is a little expensive. Because it is one of the best in the market, it is a little bit more expensive than other vendors."
"Prisma is in the middle of the road. It's not the most expensive, but it's not the cheapest. There aren't any additional costs, to my knowledge. I know they have some extra modules, but we didn't use them."
"The solution is expensive."
"The licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis and for what we get, the price is good."
"The solution requires a license and the technical support has extra costs. The licensing model could improve."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
849,210 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about iboss?
Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss.
What needs improvement with iboss?
Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used it for student and faculty filtering on campus.
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Netscope, Zscaler if they continue route they are on now. FIrewalls needs great deal of automation on each end, datac...
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Those firewalls that allow extend the perimeter. Nowadays, there is a issue with the static perimeter and all is goin...
What do you like most about Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway?
There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are alread...
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What do you like most about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
From my experience, Palo Alto is more expensive compared to solutions like Netskope and Triscale.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Prisma Access, GlobalProtect, Palo Alto GlobalProtect Mobile Security Manager, Prisma SaaS by Palo Alto Networks, Prisma Access
 

Overview

 

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.
Arrow, Cloudrise, Sainsbury, Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy, CSA, AVX Corporation Nuna, City of San Diego Case, Genomic Health Case Study, Oak Hill Advisors, MaRS Discovery District.
Concord Hospital, State of Colorado, Essilor International, RheinLand Versicherungsgruppe, University of Westminster, Universidade Nove de Julho, SPAR Austria, CAME Group, ZipRealty, Greenhill & Co., IKT Agder, Aviva Stadium, Animal Logic, Management & Training Corporation, Brigham Young University Hawaii, School District of Chilliwack
Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,210 professionals have used our research since 2012.