We performed a comparison between Netskope and Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 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 most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"It has hundreds of features and many of them are useful."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is protection."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"It's a comprehensive security portfolio solution."
"The interface is good."
"Web filtering and DLP are good features."
"The solution offers good security functionality."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its three modules, which are SWG, ZTNA, and CASB."
"We've found the solution to be quite stable."
"As Netskope is a cloud-based application, it is possible to analyze and distinguish personal and enterprise instances."
"We can connect cloud apps and monitor them."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is that everything is on the cloud. It has no on-premise hardware to deal with."
"The solution's CASB, DLP, and threat protection features are very good."
"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."
"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"
"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."
"They could add endpoint security features."
"The initial setup is complex and should be simplified."
"If we need to allow a process that is blocked by Netskope, we have to manually check the logs to see why it is blocked. This can be time-consuming and inefficient"
"Compatibility with other proxy polars would be helpful."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"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."
"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."
"It should have user behavior analysis and diverse analysis."
"The stability of the solution to be very good. It is not the best and could improve but it is better than other solutions, such as Forcepoint."
"The accuracy could be improved."
"There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow."
"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."
"The initial setup is a bit complex in that it takes a lot of time. In order to get the product to work as you need it to, there is a lot of configuration required."
"Cost competitiveness is its area of improvement. They will have to figure out how can they strategically price it because there are a few players in the game who have been doing it for a long time. They will have to figure out how to go to market on the pricing."
"They should work on marketing material to put out their work with a little more effort."
"Improvement in the solution is required in certain areas where the product does not provide access to its direct end users, who use the portal as an administrator."
More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews while Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is ranked 13th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 13 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is rated 8.8. 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 Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway writes "Offer capability to create policy groups aligned with specific requirements for users, groups, and locations". Netskope is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Forcepoint ONE, whereas Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Symantec Proxy, Cisco Umbrella, Fortinet FortiGate SWG, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Web Security Appliance. See our Netskope vs. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway report.
We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.