We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Connect and Netskope based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users appreciate the more comprehensive security features offered by Check Point Harmony Connect, including file emulation, USB control, and full disk encryption. Check Point Harmony Connect also has HTTPS decryption, SAML integration, and Zero Trust Network Access, as well as granular policies, monitoring, and weekly reports. Although Netskope has valuable features, such as cloud app authorization and classification, users have reported needing better integration with other solutions and improved support services. Check Point Harmony Connect's pricing and licensing are generally acceptable, with some flexibility depending on the user's location and situation.
"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."
"Check Point provides high-quality technical support. The support was pretty quick."
"Review of exported and imported packages and protection and content filtering have been useful."
"The solution offers ATP features and management features."
"The product's initial setup phase is very simple."
"What I like about Harmony Connect is that every packet through the network is screened and filtered so that only clean packets can enter the PC. This is useful for a variety of security reasons because you no longer need to worry about things like DDoS attacks."
"It is a very stable solution."
"The integration that this solution has with the different routers or perimeter equipment is exceptional."
"I find it very easy to implement and deploy in the organization."
"It's a comprehensive security portfolio solution."
"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."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"The solution offers a better understanding of the real scenario and identifies the cloud apps that are being utilized."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"Amazing reporting and tracking mechanisms."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"Their technical support is very good."
"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."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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."
"There is an issue when installing the Check Point client."
"They could improve on the available public documentation."
"The main problem with Harmony Connect is that, because it's in a new category of offerings by Check Point, there's very little marketing of the product so far, and this means that many potential users don't even know this kind of solution is available. There are also few testimonials or case studies talking about people who have used the product and fell in love with it, for example."
"Harmony lacks this ability when anything more than a vanilla access policy is used (we use layers and source user objects in our policy which make this impossible according to Check Point)."
"The tool could be more user-friendly."
"The solution requires you to buy a minimum of 50 licenses and that is not practical."
"As it is a new market solution, I still face some instabilities in access at certain times of the day when I have more than 150 users using it simultaneously."
"My customers want more remote functionality. They need another routing option after they connect to the enterprise intranet. For example, let's say a user tries to connect to a remote branch office and headquarters through Harmony Connect. They need a local breakout after connecting to the headquarters, especially in China. They need to put local breakout in the Chinese internet. The current version cannot do something like this."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
"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."
"They can focus more on ease of admin, ease of use, and ease of migration. Migration should be simple for companies that are using a different platform and would like to move to Netskope. Everyone looks for a simple migration. They can also focus more on cloud services and cloud trends. They have to see the cloud market, and they should try to compete with Zscaler and other players. They should also work on licensing costs."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"They could improve their mobile agents as they have some limitations."
"The configuration and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"Lacking in local customer support."
Check Point Quantum SASE is ranked 8th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 31 reviews while Netskope is ranked 4th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 35 reviews. Check Point Quantum SASE is rated 8.4, while Netskope is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point Quantum SASE writes "Very agile with a granular level of control over users ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". Check Point Quantum SASE is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Perimeter 81, Cisco Umbrella and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas Netskope is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Symantec CloudSOC CASB. See our Check Point Quantum SASE vs. Netskope report.
See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.