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 has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"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."
"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."
"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 base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"The product's scalability is good."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"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."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"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."
"From an audit or security perspective, the solution has been very stable so far."
"This solution provides a DLP on the cloud and very few people have a scanning device for data at rest."
"It's great that we can make sure a machine meets the minimum requirements before users are allowed to log in."
"Prisma Access provides better app performance, allows all the traffic that's really needed for applications and internal resources without any impact on the hardware, and can be continuously scaled in case more resources are needed."
"The solution also provides traffic analysis, threat prevention, URL filtering, and segmentation. That combination is important because it enhances the protection and makes the traffic more secure. It also keeps things more up-to-date, enabling us to deal with more of the current threats."
"The solution has all its capabilities in a single cloud delivery platform which is great and it provides overall good protection."
"The most valuable feature of Prisma Cloud-native, in my opinion, is that it assists in identifying, analyzing, and remediating vulnerabilities."
"The performance is good."
 

Cons

"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."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"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."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"The endpoint-type solution is an area that needs some improvement."
"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 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."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"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 product is not easy to use."
"If we compare it with Zscaler, Netskope Private Access requires more configuration for setup of the overall solution."
"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."
"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."
"The cloud setup is straightforward, and the onboarding process is much better, but the on-premises initial setup is slightly complex."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"The solution needs to be more compatible with other solutions. This is specifically a problem for us when it comes to healthcare applications. They have proprietary connection types and things of that nature that make compatibility a challenge sometimes."
"It wasn't so satisfying to work with it. There is room for improvement in the policy management. It is difficult to cover the entire scenery through Palo Alto products."
"The Prisma Access could improve in terms of adding more machine learning and AI capabilities to automate tasks such as incident response."
"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."
"They automatically update and they should give us time to fully understand what they're updating so that we can make sure it doesn't impact production."
"It applies commits to the firewalls slowly. There isn't an API you can use for anything. We've previously had trouble with the egress IP addresses though we expressed to engineering that those mustn't change. They changed several times without warning, causing a lot of headaches."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."
"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 not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"It is significantly cost-effective compared to its contenders."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"Compared to other products, the price is slightly high."
"Actually the solution is very expensive. I don't know the particulars since the purchasing team dealt with it."
"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."
"The licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis and for what we get, the price is good."
"This is not an expensive product and everything is included with one license."
"They price their products using credit modules."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution, especially when compared to other solutions like Cisco. There are no additional charges apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution."
"Prisma SaaS is more expensive than similar solutions but I think it's worth it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
911,602 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing 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.
911,602 professionals have used our research since 2012.