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 #13 with an average rating of 8.5, while Palo Alto Networks is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.5. Netskope holds a 3.0% mindshare in ZaaS, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 10.4% 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 896,099 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 May 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 3.0%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 10.4%, down from 14.9% 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	10.4%
iboss	3.2%
Netskope Private Access	3.0%
Other	83.4%

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

"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."

"I would say iboss is a very good product; its scalability is very good, and it's seamless for the user."

"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."

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

"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."

"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."

"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."

More iboss pros

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

"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."

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

"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."

"It is a stable 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."

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

"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."

More Netskope Private Access pros

"It's great that we can make sure a machine meets the minimum requirements before users are allowed to log in."

"Prisma's most valuable feature would be its ability to identify bad or risky configurations."

"It supports auto-scaling for mobile users. It auto-scales depending on the mobile user traffic. For example, if 1,000 people are working from home today, and tomorrow, the number increases to 2,000, it is not going to be an issue."

"The stacked policies, event policies, and routing policies are easy to understand for someone with general knowledge."

"The most valuable feature of Prisma Cloud-native, in my opinion, is that it assists in identifying, analyzing, and remediating vulnerabilities."

"Prisma Access does everything beautifully."

"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it offers stability and scalability while being a very secure product."

"Prisma integrates pretty nicely even if you aren't using other Palo Alto products, is very effective for a CSP solution, and the time to value is almost instant because as soon as you stand it up, it shows value by telling you all the vulnerabilities or risks in that environment."

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks pros

Cons

"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."

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

"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."

"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."

"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."

"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."

"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability within the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing."

More iboss cons

"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."

"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 could improve by enhancing visibility of user performance and application performance. It should also integrate wider DLP and inspection engines on private access traffic."

"The cost has room for improvement."

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

"The ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."

"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."

"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."

More Netskope Private Access cons

"We are using the SaaS offering. We use our applications for microservices. We use Twistlock to scan containers, and it displays these results in Prisma, which is a good feature because we can see vulnerabilities with respect to these containers. We can see everything in a very detailed manner. However, when you have different environments for a single application, such as DEV, QA, PROD, and TEST, all these environments run multiple containers, which can lead to a very high number of containers. In such a scenario, it shows you the alerts for all those containers that have vulnerabilities. If you show the results of all the containers that share the same image, it is not going to add any value. Therefore, they should narrow down the alerts based on a container. It should show information for a single container. Otherwise, the person who is looking at the results gets the impression that he has to fix all these issues. This is something that they can improve."

"If you compare Prisma SaaS against other products, such as Cloud Log, it's a little bit tricky to understand, but it offers different functionality that other products don't have."

"Dependencies of applications sometimes is a bit confusing."

"However, when you have different environments for a single application, such as DEV, QA, PROD, and TEST, all these environments run multiple containers, which can lead to a very high number of containers."

"There is some particular traffic that the security team wants to filter out and apply their own policies and they cannot."

"It is a managed firewall. When you run into issues and have to troubleshoot, there is a fair amount of restriction."

"Their next release should provide solutions for the mobile environment."

"I would like to see better pricing and an easier logging process. Also, if there was a way to log a global log, everything could go onto the system."

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks cons

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."

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

"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."

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

"The pricing of the solution is cheap."

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

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

"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."

"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."

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

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

More Netskope Private Access pricing and cost advice

"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."

"I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing."

"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."

"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."

"Prisma SaaS is more expensive than similar solutions but I think it's worth it."

"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."

"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 pricing for this solution is on the higher end."

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

896,099 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
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 8% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs iboss

Compared 5% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 18% 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 7% of the time

Cloudflare One vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) 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 7% 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

Fortinet FortiGate vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 2% of the time

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

May 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

896,099 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.