We compared Netskope and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks based on our users' reviews across four parameters. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Users prefer Netskope for its advanced analytics and granular policy enforcement, while Prisma Access may be a better choice for its scalability and ease of use. Users praise Netskope for its comprehensive data protection capabilities, advanced analytics, and granular policy enforcement. However, they have expressed a desire for a more intuitive interface, better customer support, improved performance during high-traffic periods, and more comprehensive reporting capabilities. Users appreciate Prisma Access for its ease of use, scalability, and flexibility but have concerns about speed and performance, compatibility with certain applications and platforms, and customer support.
Features: Netskope offers comprehensive data protection, advanced threat protection, advanced analytics, and granular policy enforcement. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks focuses on robust security measures, advanced threat prevention, secure connectivity, scalability, and flexibility.
Pricing and ROI: Netskope is praised for its competitive pricing options and straightforward setup process, ensuring a smooth customer experience. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is affordable and provides good value for money. The setup cost is reasonable, and the licensing process is user-friendly for both products. Netskope users reported significant value and cost savings, emphasizing its effectiveness in data protection. Prisma Access users also experienced positive results, indicating a significant ROI.
Room for Improvement: Netskope could improve its interface, customer support, performance during high-traffic periods, and reporting capabilities. Prisma Access could enhance its speed and performance, compatibility with certain applications and platforms, and customer support.
Deployment and customer support: Some Netskope users found the initial setup to be simple and quick, as it only involves rolling out an agent and can be deployed on the cloud. However, others mentioned that the implementation phase can be complex and time-consuming, requiring coordination and effort. The deployment process was generally considered easy, especially for those with a networking background. Palo Alto Networks has a setup that varies in terms of ease and complexity. Some users found the initial setup to be straightforward, while others mentioned it was more complex and required help from Palo Alto or a partner. The deployment durations range from a few hours to several months, depending on factors such as the size of the environment and the number of branch offices. Users praise Netskope for their knowledge and expertise in addressing queries and concerns, emphasizing the excellent level of assistance received. Prisma Access received positive feedback for its knowledgeable and friendly staff, who efficiently address concerns and provide valuable guidance.
The summary above is based on 38 interviews we conducted with Netskope and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"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 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."
"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 solution is stable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"They are very good at CASB as compared to other players."
"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."
"It's a comprehensive security portfolio solution."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"The initial setup of Netskope CASB is easy, it is not complex."
"The automation offered by the product is pretty solid."
"The solution also provides traffic analysis, threat prevention, URL filtering, and segmentation. That combination is important because it enhances the protection and makes the traffic more secure. It also keeps things more up-to-date, enabling us to deal with more of the current threats."
"It has predefined or preconfigured rules, which are getting periodically updated. They are providing continuous improvements and periodically updating all search queries that they are looking for. That is one thing that helps us to stay vigilant and focused. If we query our AWS account for any breaches or vulnerabilities with any of the cloud tests, and it alerts us based on these predefined rules. It also provides an option to configure our own rules, and based on these rules, it can query the cloud trail logs, pull the information, and trigger alerts in real-time. I haven't explored this feature much because there are multiple accounts, and we don't have enough time to explore this feature. It also provides multiple integrations. When vulnerabilities or breaches are happening, you should be aware of them immediately. It provides integration with tools such as Slack, PagerDuty so that you can get alerted as soon as the high severity stuff comes up. For example, you have a security group that has allowed public traffic on port 22. As TechOps, you should be aware of this immediately. You cannot scan each machine or look into all security groups to identify it. So, Prisma helps us and alerts us when this kind of high-priority stuff comes up. It has different statistics, analytics, and graphs for data. The description of alerts is also pretty good. They describe what are the possible causes for this and what are the solutions. From Prisma Cloud, you can directly go to the AWS account. When you click on an alert, a resource, or a resource ID, it takes you to the AWS console where you need to log in. If you are already logged in, it will take you to that instance directly, and you can fix the issue there. I have found this feature very useful."
"It supports auto-scaling for mobile users. It auto-scales depending on the mobile user traffic. For example, if 1,000 people are working from home today, and tomorrow, the number increases to 2,000, it is not going to be an issue."
"The features I find most valuable is WildFire, user integration, and the basic technology features."
"The solution is not very complex and is easy to manage for people who may or may not have knowledge about Palo Alto Networks."
"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."
"It's much faster and more secure than legacy solutions. It is also quite stable and scalable as well. We are able to see all the traffic in one place."
"The solution's most valuable features were the model's reduced complexity on the client side and its capability to provide security."
"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 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"
"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."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"It should have user behavior analysis and diverse analysis."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"Setting up policies is something that we having been doing, and if the vendor were to provide example use cases that included different implementation options then it would be very useful for us."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I haven't seen any SD-WAN configuration capability. If Prisma Access would support SD-WAN, that would help... SD-WAN devices should be able to reach Prisma Access, and Palo Alto should support different, vendor-specific devices, not just Palo Alto devices, for SD-WAN configuration."
"Their next release should provide solutions for the mobile environment."
"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."
"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."
"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 BGP filtering options on Prisma Access should be improved."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope is ranked 4th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 35 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 58 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. 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 Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks writes "Integration with Palo Alto platforms such as Cortex Data Lake and Autofocus gives us visibility into our attack surface". Netskope is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella, Skyhigh Security and Forcepoint ONE, whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma SD-WAN and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. See our Netskope vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks report.
See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors and best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.