We performed a comparison between Netskope and Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"The automation offered by the product is pretty solid."
"The solution offers a better understanding of the real scenario and identifies the cloud apps that are being utilized."
"It's one of the top-ranking solutions in the market, and it's very responsive. We are using Netskope, and Netskope provides a load of features for SQL, STP, and traffic control."
"The feature that I like best is the GUI."
"I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust."
"The interface is good."
"Their technical support is very good."
"The quarantine feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"From stability and availability standpoints, it is pretty good."
"The tool's most valuable feature is reporting. It helps us understand what's going on in our environment."
"The product is stable."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"The solution is still pretty new to the CASB environment."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"If we need to allow a process that is blocked by Netskope, we have to manually check the logs to see why it is blocked. This can be time-consuming and inefficient"
"Technical support and the user interface could be improved."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution."
"In some cases, when you have a lot of policies, it can get confusing for users and you can get lost in the GUI."
"The TLS encryption needs to be improved. It's not state of the art."
"I think some of the hiccups that we had were with the number of domains that we had and how that had to be implemented in Proofpoint."
"They are priced significantly higher and less cost-effective than alternative options."
"Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker should be cheaper."
More Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews while Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is ranked 14th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 4 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker writes "A highly stable spam filtering solution that can be managed and used by a large number of users". Netskope is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Skyhigh Security, whereas Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Skyhigh Security. See our Netskope vs. Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.