Netskope Private Access vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks comparison

Netskope and Palo Alto Networks are both solutions in the ZTNA as a Service category. Netskope is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.5, while Palo Alto Networks is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.5. Netskope holds a 2.8% mindshare in ZaaS, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 10.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Netskope users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Palo Alto Networks users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Netskope Private Access offer competing solutions in the secure access market. Users show higher satisfaction with the features and deployment ease of Netskope Private Access, while Prisma Access stands out in customer service and pricing.

What features are offered by Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks in comparison to Netskope Private Access?

Prisma Access provides comprehensive security integrations, reliable performance, and extensive threat intelligence. Netskope Private Access offers advanced data protection, flexible access controls, and cloud-native architecture.

What areas of improvement can be found in Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks in comparison to Netskope Private Access?

Prisma Access needs to simplify troubleshooting, reduce performance lags, and improve user experience. Netskope requires enhanced reporting tools, better application support, and improved integration capabilities.

How is the ease of deployment and customer service of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks in comparison to Netskope Private Access?

Prisma Access deployment is streamlined but requires technical expertise, with strong post-deployment support. Netskope deployment is straightforward with less technical demand, though customer support needs improvement.

What setup costs and ROI can be seen with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks in comparison to Netskope Private Access?

Prisma Access has reasonable setup costs with justified ROI due to enhanced security. Netskope is higher-priced but ROI is worthwhile due to comprehensive features. Prisma Access is cost-effective with solid ROI; Netskope is premium-priced but justified.

To learn more, read our detailed Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 899,917 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 June 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.5%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 2.8%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 10.1%, down from 14.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks	10.1%
iboss	3.5%
Netskope Private Access	2.8%
Other	83.6%

ZTNA as a Service

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.

Read full review

Prathamesh Samant

Presales Manager at a manufacturing company with 201-500 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

IgorPinter

Director at PULSEC

Zero-trust access has improved remote security and now simplifies cloud-based firewall management

Regarding the integration part for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, the integration with identity providers is pretty much good. It is basically firewall as a service, so it performs well. I completed the integration without any issues. What Palo Alto Networks can do better for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is probably to have the point of presence available in more locations. The point of presence from the Serbia region has the nearest POP in Frankfurt, which is an issue since it is your gateway—when you start browsing the internet, you go through a commercial connection in Germany. They definitely need to spread the service in other countries.

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 among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

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

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."

"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"

"iboss is definitely very good in terms of service."

More iboss pros

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

"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."

"There are several valuable features, like advanced security protections, especially the DLP (Data Loss Protection), and there's also browser and web filtering, or content filtering for our users to protect them when accessing certain links or websites, ensuring their security and permission."

"The product's scalability is good."

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

"They do one software or one platform; they are the leading CASBY platform in the world, and what they can do, nobody can do."

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

More Netskope Private Access pros

"This is the best product that I have looked at, out of all of the competitors."

"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."

"Overall, the cost savings, ease of deployment, and better VPN user experience and performance are valuable."

"I think the stability of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is excellent, and I would rate it ten out of ten."

"It's quite reliable and performs well for users."

"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."

"Overall, it's a great solution that works quite well."

"For anybody who is looking for a contained-based solution, I definitely recommend this product."

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks pros

Cons

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

"iboss can be improved because the integration could be better; you need to import all the sites that you access today, and there are a few problems whenever you import thousands of websites, making the integration process messy for the users."

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

"The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices; it is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents, and that is where in 2025 we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform."

"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."

"Its pricing could be better."

"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."

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

More iboss cons

"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."

"Netskope Private Access only supports TCP and UDP ports and does not support ICMP or ping."

"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."

"Netskope detects certain data or contents, but there are some limitations on how we can customize those policies for DLP."

"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."

"The product is not easy to use."

"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."

"The cost has room for improvement."

More Netskope Private Access cons

"It's not very easy to use. Sometimes it's buggy and there are problems when doing updates."

"Its integration with non-Palo Alto products can be improved. Currently, it is easy to integrate it with other Palo Alto products such as Cortex XDR. It integrates well with other Palo Alto products. A major part of our network is based on Palo Alto products, but for those companies that use multi-vendor products in their infrastructure, Palo Alto should optimize the integration of Prisma Access with the network devices from other vendors."

"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."

"In general, it is good, but everything could be a little bit better. For example, they are working on including more data to catch or trying to reduce the gaps between the matches."

"The licensing model isn't flexible enough. It's an all-or-nothing model. Other providers in the market allow you to buy modules or add-ons separately. With Prisma Access, you have to purchase the same module for all users."

"My clients would like to see a more feature-rich product."

"We've run into some challenges, having hit a lot of bugs over the past year in the deployment of GlobalProtect."

"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."

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"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."

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

"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."

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

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

"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."

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

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

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

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

"The pricing of the solution is cheap."

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

More Netskope Private Access pricing and cost advice

"The pricing can be difficult because it came to us with another agreement, but it can be negotiated. I highly recommend people to compare this product's performance and pricing against BetterCloud, because I feel BetterCloud is better than Prisma SaaS if they're starting from scratch."

"Based on what I have heard from others, it is a pricey solution as compared to its peers, but I am not sure. However, considering the features that it offers, it is a break-even point. You get whatever they are promising."

"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."

"Prisma Access is a little bit expensive."

"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."

"As compared to other solutions, Prisma Access is much cheaper. It is probably 30% to 40% cheaper than other solutions, but I do not know the exact cost."

"The licensing cost is about 18,000 euros."

"The price has been good for the ROI during these difficult times for the cruise industry. There are no hidden costs; what the product offers is what you get."

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks 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

899,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	8

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	26
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	27

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...

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

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?

Regarding the integration part for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, the integration with identity providers is pr...

See all answers

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 5% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 16% 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 8% of the time

Cloudflare One vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Duo vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 4% of the time

More Netskope Private Access Competitors

Netskope vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 11% of the time

FortiSASE vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 6% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 6% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 5% of the time

OpenVPN Access Server vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

June 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access

May 2026

Download Netskope Private Access product report

Buyer's Guide

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

May 2026

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks report

Download Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks product report

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

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

Netskope Private Access is innovatively designed to offer secure remote access by eliminating inbound connectivity risks and requiring minimal maintenance, focusing on specific access controls and real-time adaptive policies.

Netskope Private Access stands out for its approach to securing connectivity without using conventional VPNs. It grants granular application access, implements adaptive policies, and ensures low latency with unrestricted bandwidth. Enhanced security features like device checks, Data Loss Protection, and content filtering align with its standard pricing. Meanwhile, its integration capabilities, although complex, facilitate secure connections to internal resources such as Active Directory, supporting compliance standards while migrating from legacy VPN solutions.

What are the key features of Netskope Private Access?

No Inbound Connectivity: Eliminates risks of unauthorized access.
Granular Application Access: Provides specific and detailed access control.
Adaptive Policies: Real-time policy adjustments based on user and device context.
Device Checks: Enhances security with thorough verification measures.
Data Loss Protection & Content Filtering: Protects sensitive data and monitors traffic content.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Secure Remote Access: Ensures safe connectivity for remote workforces.
Performance Optimization: Offers seamless, low-latency connectivity.
Scalability and Flexibility: Adapts easily to growing remote access demands.
Simplified Management: Streamlines management without traditional VPN issues.

In sectors like finance and healthcare, organizations deploy Netskope Private Access to enable secure remote access while maintaining compliance. These industries benefit by facilitating remote connections to critical internal applications, reducing downtime and inefficiencies typically associated with VPNs. Industries also leverage adaptive policies to ensure compliance with security protocols and real-time monitoring of remote access.

Netskope

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks delivers robust security features including secure remote access across apps and traffic monitoring. It integrates smoothly with cloud environments to provide advanced threat protection and visibility into network traffic.

Prisma Access offers a comprehensive suite of security tools designed to protect cloud environments and remote workforces. With its focus on real-time risk identification and threat prevention, Prisma Access provides encrypted tunnels and centralized management for seamless connectivity and enhanced data security. Designed to scale across platforms like AWS, Azure, and GCP, it optimizes traffic and connectivity while offering extensive visibility into vulnerabilities. However, integration with third-party products, usability, and support services are areas for development, as users report interface challenges and desire improved scalability and geographic coverage, especially in regions like China and South America.

What are the key features of Prisma Access?

Real-Time Risk Identification: Detects and manages potential threats instantly.
Secure Remote Access: Ensures secure connectivity to applications from anywhere.
Traffic Monitoring: Provides comprehensive oversight of network traffic.
Seamless Integration: Works well with platforms like AWS, Azure, and GCP.
Firewall Capabilities: Blocks unauthorized access and threats.
Scalability: Adapts to various cloud environments to meet growing demands.

What benefits should users expect when evaluating Prisma Access?

Reduced Data Breach Risk: Protects sensitive information through encrypted connections.
User-Friendly Interface: Simplifies management and configuration tasks.
Centralized Management: Offers a single view for managing all security policies.
Advanced Threat Protection: Regular updates guard against new threats.

Prisma Access is effectively used in industries requiring secure remote access and stringent data protection, such as finance and healthcare. Organizations leverage it to enforce Zero Trust policies, optimize network performance with SD-WAN, and ensure security compliance across multiple platforms.

Palo Alto Networks

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.

Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy

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

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

April 2026

Free Report: Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

899,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks 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.