We performed a comparison between Netskope Private Access and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ZTNA as a Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."In the VPN scenario, what was happening, the user would get back to the complete source. But in NPA, the application will go to the user. There is an outbound connection. There is no inbound. Storage providers are also not there. It's the best feature because it is the replacement of the VPN."
"The most valuable feature is being able to see who is accessing the application, whether it is a managed device or a bring-your-own-device published by Netskope."
"It is a stable solution."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"The product's scalability is good."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"There is a system for monitoring the traffic. You can monitor the traffic of the connected people and point out any issues on the connection part."
"Its frontend is user-friendly. It is easy to use for us."
"The features I find most valuable is WildFire, user integration, and the basic technology features."
"It is easy to use, easy to integrate, and is stable. It's scalable as well."
"To quarantine and clean a malware file provides a lot of security."
"The solution has all its capabilities in a single cloud delivery platform which is great and it provides overall good protection."
"The solution is not very complex and is easy to manage for people who may or may not have knowledge about Palo Alto Networks."
"Prisma helped us build a moat around our production systems. It's now impossible to log into our production from a non-MDM laptop. Prisma Access provides decent security overall."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"The major problem that we are facing is if we deploy Netskope on the server level or if we get a new server in the EMEA factor, it will affect all the machines. Recently, this has caused us to fail some reviews."
"I would like to see them go down the path of including SD-WAN. Currently, they don't do SD-WAN. If they could somehow natively do that inside of the platform, that would be amazing. I don't know if they're going to do it, but it would be amazing if they do."
"The solution needs to develop faster features. Its interoperability feature is not working. It takes six months to one year for any product to implement the improvements. However, the process should be faster to implement the changes quickly."
"Netskope Private Access only supports TCP and UDP ports and does not support ICMP or ping."
"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."
"Netskope Private Access allows mapping only one DNS server. If a user uses a secondary DNS on-premises, Netskope fails to disconnect them. This is an issue that needs to be addressed."
"When it comes to integration mechanisms, Prisma SaaS does not support reverse proxy type of integrations."
"Better integration with the MDM solution would be useful."
"It would be nice to manage Prisma Access through the cloud instead of through Panorama. You can use the cloud version to monitor Prisma Access, but it doesn't have all the features yet, and it's not 100% done."
"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."
"I would like to see support for custom applications."
"From any improvement perspective, the product's compatibility issues with Linux need to be resolved."
"Palo Alto Prisma 10 came out over a year ago. Palo Alto added this identity management feature. The legacy way Palo Alto selected which user is sitting on an IP address it passes through has been clunky."
"The initial support team is not very good. Most of the time, I have found that they are one to three years experienced only. They don't have network expertise. They know about Palo Alto products but don't know how to troubleshoot the issues. We have to guide them most of the time to troubleshoot correctly since their approach is not developed."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope Private Access is ranked 7th in ZTNA as a Service with 14 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 2nd in ZTNA as a Service with 57 reviews. Netskope Private Access is rated 8.6, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Netskope Private Access writes "Provides network visibility, infrastructure protection and advanced security protections, especially the DLP (Data Loss Protection)". 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 Private Access is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Appgate SDP, Cisco Secure Client, Google BeyondCorp Remote Access and Jamf Connect, whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Netskope , Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Prisma SD-WAN. See our Netskope Private Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.
