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
6.7
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
Netskope Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
15th
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 November 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.4%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 2.3%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 9.8%, down from 13.0% 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 Networks9.8%
iboss3.4%
Netskope Private Access2.3%
Other84.5%
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

"Deploying iboss leads to good return on investment, estimated around 70% to 80%."
"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."
"I recommend iboss for organizations looking for strong cloud-based web security and centralized access control."
"As I mentioned, the return on investment is significant, as it saved our office locations' bandwidth because when you are working remotely at home, your internet traffic routes directly to iboss and will not go to your office building, saving bandwidth bottlenecks and ensuring that issues with our building internet circuits will not impact your internet connectivity because you are directly going to the iboss data center."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"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."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"I would say iboss is a very good product; its scalability is very good, and it's seamless for the user."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable 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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the zero-trust part of this solution."
"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."
"Prisma integrates well with Cortex XDR and Cortex Data Lake. My company has been also using Prisma Access in-house for nearly a year, and it integrates seamlessly."
"The cloud VPN features mean we can connect everywhere and track where all our users are connecting, and Prisma Access came out with new, innovative features, including client-tracking, which was more valuable for our company and very impressive for us."
"Its frontend is user-friendly. It is easy to use for us."
"Palo Alto Firewall is one of the best firewalls in the world."
"Considering this work from home scenario in COVID, it is one of the best solutions one can implement."
"It is geographically dispersed, and it sits on top of Google and AWS platforms. Therefore, you don't face the standard issues, such as latency or bandwidth issues, that you usually face in the case of on-prem data centers."
 

Cons

"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."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"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."
"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"If we compare it with Zscaler, Netskope Private Access requires more configuration for setup of the overall solution."
"Netskope detects certain data or contents, but there are some limitations on how we can customize those policies for DLP."
"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."
"Netskope Private Access could improve by enhancing visibility of user performance and application performance. It should also integrate wider DLP and inspection engines on private access traffic."
"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."
"The main challenge we are facing across various Trust Network Access (TNA) technologies, including Netskope, is their inability to support broadcast applications or those relying on broadcasting protocols."
"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 ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."
"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."
"I would like the solution to support a different type of authentication. We can't configure a secondary method for our portal."
"There should be a dedicated portal or SASE-based solution. They're trying to add a plugin but it needs a dedicated portal because it is now an enterprise solution for multiple organizations. People should be able to directly log in to a dedicated page for Prisma Access, rather than going into a Panorama plugin, and always having to update the plugin."
"Palo Alto's operational and support model needs improvement since we have faced issues with resolving problems."
"Pricing for Prisma Access and Prisma SD WAN is high due to the need for different hardware flavors like IONs."
"The licensing of this solution is a little expensive and is paid on an annual basis."
"It is a managed firewall. When you run into issues and have to troubleshoot, there is a fair amount of restriction. You run into a couple of restrictions where you don't have any visibility on what is happening on the Palo Alto managed infrastructure, and you need to get on a call to get technical assistance from Palo Alto's technical support. You have to get them to work with you to fix the problem. I would definitely like them to work on the visibility into what happens inside Palo Alto's infrastructure. It is not about getting our hands onto their infrastructure to do troubleshooting or fixing problems; it is just about getting more visibility. This will help us in guiding technical support folks to the area where they need to work."
"The frequency of updates could be reduced."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"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."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
"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."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"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."
"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"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."
"There's no reason not to buy the enterprise version that gives you unlimited PoPs, but you must understand the limitations you impose on yourself if you do that. If you go crazy, that allowlist will be too big for Kubernetes clusters."
"The solution is expensive."
"Prisma SaaS is more expensive than similar solutions but I think it's worth it."
"Prisma Access is a little bit expensive."
"The licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis and for what we get, the price is good."
"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."
"In terms of pricing, considering that it is a two or three years old solution, they should apply big discounts for the next two or three years. This approach will be better for them to capture the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
921,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise16
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?
iboss could be improved by making the dashboard more user-friendly, providing more detailed real-time alerts, and imp...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
iboss is primarily used for cloud security, helping to protect users when they access websites and cloud applications...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
The pricing and licensing for iboss were reasonable for the security features. The setup costs were manageable, thoug...
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

Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.
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: September 2026.
921,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.