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
6.9
Number of Reviews
24
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

"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"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."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"iboss is definitely very good in terms of service."
"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 would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"Netskope Private Access covers a wide range of use cases with solutions for client-server and server-to-client connectivity patterns."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable 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."
"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 being able to see who is accessing the application, whether it is a managed device or a bring-your-own-device published by Netskope."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"The remediation process is easy compared to other platforms."
"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."
"Anyone who is considering working with Prisma Access should go ahead and implement it."
"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."
"I would recommend Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks as it is really good, but it would be much better if the pricing were lower so that I could provide cloud firewall services instead of physical firewalls to customers."
"My advice for those who are looking for a SaaS solution is to use Prisma; it's one of the best solutions in the industry at the moment, simpler and really easy to deploy, with a very trustworthy support team from Palo Alto."
"Overall, I am very happy with the security provided by Prisma Access."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to change the gateway. For example, if there's a problem with a specific region or vendor, we can make modifications. The solution is scalable, and there are different gateways that can be created depending on the demand."
 

Cons

"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"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 endpoint-type solution is an area that needs some 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."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"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."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"If we compare it with Zscaler, Netskope Private Access requires more configuration for setup of the overall solution."
"The ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."
"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 allows mapping only one DNS server. If a user uses a secondary DNS on-premises, Netskope fails to disconnect them. This is an issue that needs to be addressed."
"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."
"Netskope Private Access only supports TCP and UDP ports and does not support ICMP or ping."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"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."
"Palo Alto's operational and support model needs improvement since we have faced issues with resolving problems."
"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."
"The user interface could be better. They need to work a little bit on the console. It is similar to their firewalls but not exactly. They need to clean it up a bit."
"Palo Alto needs to improve the GlobalProtect agent to work as a secure web gateway agent, not only as a VPN agent because some companies would want only a secure gateway. They wouldn't want a full VPN. So, Palo Alto has to make the VPN agent work as a secure web gateway agent for those customers who want only the secure web gateway solution."
"The pricing for this solution is on the higher end. Our customer felt that the solution was a bit overpriced but they had nothing that offered them better protection."
"I wouldn't say Prisma is particularly useful for protecting data."
"The initial support team is not very good. Most of the time, I have found that they are one to three years experienced only. They don't have network expertise. They know about Palo Alto products but don't know how to troubleshoot the issues. We have to guide them most of the time to troubleshoot correctly since their approach is not developed."
"Sometimes, you have these notifications sent out about changes in App-IDs, modifications in App-IDs, or even the introduction of entirely new App-IDs to replace. Sometimes, the recommendations are followed, but even then, when the package is installed on the firewall, it gets messed up. I remember a particular one was with Tableau, and suddenly, people weren't able to use Tableau, which is an analytics tool for business."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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 have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"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."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."
"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."
"It is significantly cost-effective compared to its contenders."
"The solution requires a license and the technical support has extra costs. The licensing model could improve."
"Actually the solution is very expensive. I don't know the particulars since the purchasing team dealt with it."
"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."
"Compared to other products, the price is slightly high."
"Prisma is in the middle of the road. It's not the most expensive, but it's not the cheapest. There aren't any additional costs, to my knowledge. I know they have some extra modules, but we didn't use them."
"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."
"It's pricey, it's not cheap. But you get what you pay for."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
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: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.