No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Netskope Private Access vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 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 ZTNA as a Service
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (6th)
Netskope Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
16th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (5th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.6%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 2.3%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 9.9%, down from 13.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks9.9%
iboss3.6%
Netskope Private Access2.3%
Other84.2%
ZTNA as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Prathamesh Samant - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
IgorPinter - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"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."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"With private access or next-gen VPN, they are able to keep you secure, but they are invisible in terms of how they do it. Anybody working from home and trying to bring up VPN quickly can pretty much get VPN up and running in a matter of minutes because this doesn't require any VPN technology on-prem. All the VPN technologies that you're using to access applications on-premise can be eliminated by using their software. If you're accessing Microsoft 365 or salesforce.com, you can go straight out from your home office or home internet to that application rather than having to come through a VPN. It still has all the policies enforced, and it mitigates any business risks in terms of how that user is accessing that application and what they're doing inside of it. VPN piece is really critical, especially at this time of Covid, and your latency also goes down. Your latency gets better by using the platform because they're intercepting your traffic, routing it through their local data center, and then sending it to whichever SaaS service or whatever you're going to. It does it better, faster, and quicker with all your governance policies enforced, rather than you having to go through your data center. So, all the traffic gets hauls there, and then that traffic has got to route somewhere else, and then it has got to go up to the cloud. Your latency actually goes down. They can guarantee 15 milliseconds or less pretty much across anywhere on the planet for about 95% or 90% of it."
"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 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 initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."
"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."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"The users can securely access any cloud data centers or cloud platforms, and in terms of the features, it has all the features that Palo Alto Next-Generation Firewall has, and it is also very stable and scalable."
"Prisma Access protects all app traffic, so that users can gain access to all apps and that's very important because we need to be able to access everything. It also allows us to access non-web apps; anything internal that we need access to, we can access."
"With this platform, you are a step ahead in knowing what you have in your environment and accomplishing the compliance goals."
"Prisma Access is very stable, and I am very much satisfied with its stability, rating it nine to ten out of ten."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"For anybody who is looking for a contained-based solution, I definitely recommend this product."
"There are plenty of features this solution provides and the most valuable would be the complete security protection we are receiving, including similar security to the Palo Alto AWS solution with features such as a firewall and machine learning AI, while the cloud server provides maximum uptime, controls, and overall strong security."
"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."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"I have heard they are doing DDoS filtering, but I am not certain if they are implementing it correctly."
"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."
"I appreciate that iboss's single pane of glass console gives centralized visibility into web traffic, user activity, security policies, and alerts from one dashboard, allowing us to quickly investigate incidents and monitor policy violations without switching between multiple tools, improving operational efficiency; however, the dashboard customization and reporting could be more flexible."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"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."
"Netskope needs to provide some kind of data protection strategy as well because, currently, if you connect through private access, we don't have any data protection policies or implementation."
"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."
"Netskope Private Access only supports TCP and UDP ports and does not support ICMP or ping."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"One thing that would help is if we could get a guide. With Cisco, for example, you can just type the problem regarding your Cisco product and you will easily get your solution. In Palo Alto, however, it's not easy to find the solutions."
"The licensing of this solution is a little expensive and is paid on an annual basis."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required. The solution's price should be lowered."
"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."
"They can add some new characteristics. For example, when an incident triggers, they can automatically send a template for a particular match that is related to the policy. We don't have that right now. It is something to improve. There could be more automation for certain actions. For example, for a particular group, it can send an administrator alert to their manager. It was one of the concerns of our customers."
"Prisma's integration between operational technology and IT should be more seamless. Right now, it requires additional setup and maintenance."
"It would be nice to manage Prisma Access through the cloud instead of through Panorama. You can use the cloud version to monitor Prisma Access, but it doesn't have all the features yet, and it's not 100% done."
"The documentation is generally good, but they could provide a more detailed description of all the configuration steps. I have to search for information or call support. Palo Alto could add more knowledge base articles about configuration with screenshots and walkthroughs. That would be helpful. When configuring a product, you want to see examples of how it is done."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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."
"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 not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"The solution requires a license and the technical support has extra costs. The licensing model could improve."
"The initial prices of Prisma Access were okay. But as soon as you start deploying Palo Alto gear, the support prices and the recurring prices, which are the major operational costs, tend to increase over time."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks has flexible licensing models with different categories. It comes with different features which can be removed if not needed. However, its pricing is high."
"The licensing model for this product is complicated and changes all the time, making it very hard for the user to comprehend the configuration."
"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."
"Palo Alto is the Cadillac solution, so their products are pretty expensive. That's just the way it is. Their solution surpasses anything else. Cisco AnyConnect, Zscaler, and all of the other products don't compare. Palo Alto is the market leader with the most features. It saves you work, and you don't have to worry about it."
"It's pricey, it's not cheap. But you get what you pay for."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
911,994 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
I think iboss could be improved by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible, and simplifying troubl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
I use iboss as a cloud-based secure web gateway to provide secure internet access, web filtering, and protect remote ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
My experience with iboss's pricing structure, setup cost, and licensing model has been positive, straightforward, and...
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...
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 ...
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...
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 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.
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...
 

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.
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
Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
911,994 professionals have used our research since 2012.