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 899,204 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

"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."

"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 iboss solution gives me the ability to scan the traffic through all the ports, through all the 131,000 PCP and UDP ports, and with this ability, we have the granularity also for consults over social media and applications on mobile, and this is an advantage that the customers are looking for right now."

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

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."

"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."

More iboss pros

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

"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."

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

"It is a stable solution."

"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."

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

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

"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."

More Netskope Private Access pros

"The overall rating for GlobalProtect is nine out of ten."

"Overall, the security provided by Prisma Access is very good."

"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."

"The remediation process is easy compared to other platforms."

"Its hands-off security and the fact that we don't have to maintain it are the most valuable features."

"It protects all app traffic so that users can gain access to all apps. Unlike other solutions that only work from ports 80 and 443, which are predominantly for web traffic, Prisma Access covers all protocols and works on all traffic patterns... The most sophisticated attacks can arise from sources that are not behind 80/443."

"To quarantine and clean a malware file provides a lot of security."

"It shows the alerts in real-time, and we are pretty happy with the service it offers."

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks pros

Cons

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."

"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 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."

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."

More iboss cons

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

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

"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."

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

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

"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."

More Netskope Private Access cons

"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."

"We've run into some challenges, having hit a lot of bugs over the past year in the deployment of GlobalProtect. We've had our fair share of issues that I haven't been happy with. We're working with the support organization to remediate them and waiting for updated releases. The response on getting the bugs fixed has not been what I would consider adequate for a product like this."

"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."

"Prisma would be a stronger solution if it could aggregate resources by project or by application. So say we have an application we've developed in AWS and five applications we've developed in Azure. The platform will group it according to those applications, but it's based on the tags we use in Azure, which means I have to rely on development teams to tag resources properly."

"Palo Alto Prisma 10 came out over a year ago. Palo Alto added this identity management feature. The legacy way Palo Alto selected which user is sitting on an IP address it passes through has been clunky."

"I would like the solution to support a different type of authentication. We can't configure a secondary method for our portal."

"Its security is good. Everything is good, but the way the dashboard responds can be improved. It takes time to implement a policy. If you change only two or three lines and push the policy to make the change work, it takes 20 to 30 minutes even for a small change. That is something very irritating from the implementation perspective."

"The one thing that I've been a little bit disappointed with is when we have had to open cases with Palo Alto about Prisma Access issues. Versus their other platforms, like their firewalls, where we tend to get really quick responses and very definitive answers, the few tickets I've had to open for Prisma Access have taken them longer to respond to. And they haven't necessarily given me the kind of answer I was looking for, meaning a fix to the problem."

More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks cons

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 not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."

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

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

"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."

More Netskope Private Access pricing and cost advice

"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 solution is expensive."

"It is a little expensive. Because it is one of the best in the market, it is a little bit more expensive than other vendors."

"We have to pay additional costs for maintenance and support services."

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

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

"Compared to other products, the price is slightly high."

"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."

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

899,204 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

13%

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 7% 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

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

899,204 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.