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.
"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."
"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 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."
"The reports give a simple overview of the traffic pattern within the organization."
"The Check Point portfolio showcases very strong products."
"It is a very stable solution."
"The installation is very easy."
"It has centralized management that allows administrators to supervise and control the security of the entire network."
"The characteristics that I have liked the most are the ease of implementation and administration."
"In Azure, we have multiple subscriptions and with every subscription, we add some kind of instance ID. We can work with the instance ID so that we allow all of the instances containing nodules. Everything else, we block. This way, if you go to outlook.com and check your email, if you log in with your company account, the instance ID will show. The network will take action according to the instance ID and say, "You are using the enterprise email. I'll let you surf. I'll let you see your email." But when you try to log in with your own email address, like Hotmail or Gmail, the instance ID will be different. This way we are not completely blocking Outlook, but we are blocking people from accessing their Outlook. We are only allowing the enterprise-level emails, and we are not allowing user-based emails."
"Netskope is a one-platform security product that provides security functions. It is the most advantageous product in the Japanese market."
"I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust."
"Technical support is good. They are very helpful and quick to resolve any issues we have."
"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 detection capability is very nice and lightweight."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"A very straightforward interface."
"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."
"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."
"Automation and scalability are areas where the solution lacks and needs to improve."
"Sometimes, the product is very slow."
"Providing USB control in a Linux environment will give more control over data security."
"There is an issue when installing the Check Point client."
"An improvement could be made in terms of achieving better coverage in such complicated regions as the Asia Pacific, China, and Russia."
"The suspend feature needs more control."
"The solution requires you to buy a minimum of 50 licenses and that is not practical."
"They could improve on the available public documentation."
"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."
"Technical support and the user interface could be improved."
"In terms of improvements, enhancing support, particularly for OEM support with quicker response times would be beneficial."
"The configuration and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"They could add endpoint security features."
"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."
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.