Netskope Reviews

Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management. 

Netskope needs to improve its stability. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

Netskope is a scalable product. My company's 30 percent of the workforce is using the product. 

The tool's technical support is good. They have premium support options and will reach back very quickly. 

Positive

My company used Netskope because it is user-friendly and has seamless deployment. It has its own cloud and is not reliant on other private cloud providers like AWS. 

A new user will encounter moderate difficulty while deploying the solution. Deployment is easy for a person with a networking background. 

The tool's pricing is not too cheap or expensive. However, it can be costly for a small business. 

I rate Netskope an eight out of ten. 

We use Netskope as a comprehensive security portfolio solution. It covers the CASB CSP. We have 300 end users in our company for this solution. We're customers of Netskope and I'm the regional IT security manager.

Valuable features of the solution are the KSP CASB and the DLP because we're not using the proxy or the web gateway. 

When we first deployed the solution we encountered some minor compatibility issues with another proxy polar, Bitscaler. It would play up and sometimes we'd get a blue screen. It was rare and the only issue we encountered with Netskope.

I would really like to see an improvement in compatibility with other platforms as it relates to issues as mentioned above. It would help to get rid of minor bugs and glitches. 

I've been using this solution for one and a half years.

This is a stable solution. 

The solution is not very scalable. Each time we need to get a new user on board to Netskope, we need to send the invitation from the portal. We need to have tools by SCCM or perhaps there's another window administration tool that I'm not aware of because I'm not the one deploying Netskope. It's still manageable in terms of getting a  new user onboard but could be easier.

The technical support is good but we pay for extended support and of course that's helpful. 

The initial setup is very easy and user friendly. You can set the profile database to see the scoring or the weighting of the security as it applies to Yahoo mail, Gmail, and Facebook, for example. Deployment time varies because we need to customize the policy for our to each cient. Deployment will probably average about a week. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

We use the product for cloud application access.

The product's integration with VMware Workspace ONE could be improved. Additionally, they could add endpoint security features similar to Trend Micro.

We have been using the platform for 18 months.

I rate the platform's stability an eight out of ten.

It is a very scalable tool.

The technical support team takes too long to reply for different time zones. We have to give them all the information from the beginning per their protocol every time.

Neutral

It is a SaaS-based solution and is deployed on the cloud. It is very fast to deploy. We took three months to complete as we had to make many changes to the previous version. I rate the process a seven out of ten.

The product's price is average. We are receiving a competitive offer from Trend Micro Apex One. So, we are evaluating it.

We are evaluating Trend Micro Apex One.

I advise others to make an inventory of all the cloud apps. They should ensure all the shadow IT instances are included in their policies.

I rate the platform an eight out of ten.

CASB: allows selective cloud service access, e.g., it allows our O365 tenant but prevents upload to other tenants.

It allows the use of cloud since we can control risks vs. just blocking access.

Tenant identification for cloud storage services.

Better debugging tools to identify operational concerns, e.g., "Netskope is slow", and the only way to prove it's not is to disable it — no data on time taken for different hops.

This mainly concerns the proxy level, with an emphasis on operational work rather than implementation. Forcepoint's implementation is completed.

Netskope's control is user-friendly and comprehensible. It also helps in conveying information effectively as a company, making it crucial for customer satisfaction. In essence, it is simple to grasp and facilitates consultant work.

In terms of improvements, enhancing support, particularly for OEM support with quicker response times would be beneficial. Additionally, incorporating an agent-based solution for endpoint DLP could be advantageous, as it's a trend seen in solutions like Forcepoint, where a single agent handles multiple tasks. By adding some features for Infant DLP, Netskope could attract more customers.

I have been working with Netskope for the past year and a half.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I'd rate the scalability an eight out of ten because there's a competing product to Cisco that might be necessary. Zscaler offers flexibility in working capabilities, especially during customer proof of concept management, though the chances of needing it are minor, around 2-3%. It's essential to consider usage details.

The main issue is convincing customers on the opposite side to switch to the rescheduled side. They need to work on ensuring that all the features provided in NetFlow are available to both end tenants and paid tenants.

They can be improved to be better. 

Neutral

The key factors for the switch are stability and user-friendliness. When providing the console to the customer's IT team or management, it should be straightforward to understand, handle, operate, and troubleshoot. However, in the case of Zscaler, while it is faster, its control interface can be a bit awkward.

The setup is easy and it is deployed on a hybrid basis. 

I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten. 

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten, with the only area for improvement being the network and endpoint aspects. Specifically, the development part for the endpoint needs work. When considering all the points mentioned earlier, I'd say it's an eight point five, which is acceptable.

Netskope is a really good product. I cannot segregate which features are the most valuable. We find most of the features to be valuable. It gives us what we are looking for.

There is no real room for improvement that I can think of. Most of the features meet our requirements. I don't see anything that can be improved now. If something would need improvement I would offer the suggestion and I believe it would be taken care of.  

Support services could definitely be improved. Support is the one area that can always use improvement. It's an evolving thing, so based on demand and based on market requirement and the way market is moving towards.

I have been using Netskope for one year. 

It's quite stable. As of now, we haven't had any kinds of bugs or anything within our environment.

It's scalable. We have around 500 users using it at my company. 

Technical support is good. 

The initial setup was straight forward. 

I would recommend it. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I have done a couple of implementations from small to large enterprise IT companies.

I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust. Additionally, the UI is very simple to work with.

There should be some granular custom roles that are not available. However, this is on the road map. There are many devices that do not have the Zero Trust feature and other enhancements available which they should have.

In an upcoming release, they need to improve the reverse proxy. There are only a limited amount of applications that support it and are not able to be managed. Additionally, there should be improvements in the policy structure to restrict scrolling up and down.

I have been using the solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable. However, if you do not keep the solution upgraded monthly you might run into some stability issues.

 The solution is suitable for small to large enterprise companies.

The technical support is very good with the premium service. They were very responsive with the solutions we needed and the tickets we were dealt with at a high priority.

The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case.

My advice to those wanting to implement the solution is you have to plan it out first. It is always good to know exactly how the solution operates before you are going to implement it. Plan it accordingly, rather than deploying it on all machines. First implement it on every business unit with some test users, test plans, test policies deployed, and test it out. Not all applications are supported by any of the security of the entire solution. Those applications that are not supported you have to bypass them. At this stage, only the deployment has to be done. You have a defined project plan and it is important to follow it.

I rate Netskope CASB a nine out of ten.

Netskope CASB is used in the company for a few shared IT cloud connections.

We are consultants. We manage the projects for implementation. We work with the customers.

Netskope CASB has improved our organization's security rather than its functionality.

The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads.

The dashboard performance could be much better and faster, but because it is a complicated product, it takes time for the dashboard to process.

I have worked with Netskope CASB for a couple of years.

Netskope CASB is a stable solution. It is comparable to any other product.

I am not familiar with the scalability of this solution because we only use it for a limited number of endpoints.

We have about 300 endpoints with five to eight users each.

This is for one customer, who may or may not be increasing the usage.

The market is currently very difficult.

We have not contacted technical support.

We worked with an integrator and never had any technical issues.

Our clients did not use any other solutions previously.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy to set up.

We deployed it in the learning mode to understand what's going on in the organization. We activated it after a few weeks.

Netskope completed the deployment.

It's difficult to quantify ROI when it comes to security. It must be breached first.

Licensing fees are paid annually.

Fees are comparable to others. Pricing is somewhere in the middle.

There are no additional licensing costs, however, there are operational costs. The customer will have to hire an additional person to train him on how to use the product.

Our clients chose Netskope CASB because it was easy to implement, and maintain.

It's simple to use and configure. It provides a nice dashboard, and live data.

I would rate Netskope CASB a nine out of ten.  The most important factors are stability, performance, and features.