We performed a comparison between Netskope Private Access and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange 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."Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"It is a stable solution."
"In the firewall, we don't have a user-based policies list, and we can't create them. Netskope helps us to create user-based policies. For example, if there are specific teams like HR or more than nine teams, and we want logs from access over particular URLs, and we don't want to allow that specific URL for certain users, we can create these policies in Netskope. It's handy, easy to use for new users, and has a cool GUI interface. We can create multiple policies, and as for the proxy, it's a leading solution."
"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 initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."
"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."
"The product's scalability is good."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"The most valuable feature is the manageability of the micro tunnels."
"Yes, it is very stable. I have never seen it go down, not once."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to establish connectivity for remote users and remote endpoints. It offers a high level of granularity compared to typical VPNs, which also encapsulate a lot of I/O."
"The scalability is pretty good."
"The most valuable features are the File Type Control and SSL bypass policies. We"
"The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability."
"Zscaler Private Access is a platform that eliminates the complexity of VPN configuration."
"We don't need to connect anymore. It is automatically connected when you log on in Windows."
"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."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"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 rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"The main challenge we are facing across various Trust Network Access (TNA) technologies, including Netskope, is their inability to support broadcast applications or those relying on broadcasting protocols."
"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."
"The ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."
"While Zscaler supports client-initiated connections, it does not support server-initiated connections. This is a feature that Zscaler may consider adding in the future."
"There could be more DLP-related features. Additionally, there needs to be flexibility for integrating ISP features."
"Zscaler Private Access's reporting is poor. We should have more insight into the reports regarding what is blocked and allowed."
"The pricing for Private Access seems to be on the expensive side, and I believe they should consider making it more competitive with other solutions."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
"It would be better if the Zscaler Private Access team made it easier for people to find subscriptions on the portal, mainly information on what my customers subscribed to or the type of licenses purchased."
"More on-prem infrastructure is required when Zscaler Private Access is to be implemented as a single point of entry."
"It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best."
Netskope Private Access is ranked 7th in ZTNA as a Service with 14 reviews while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 1st in ZTNA as a Service with 34 reviews. Netskope Private Access is rated 8.6, while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is rated 8.4. 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 Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". Netskope Private Access is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Appgate SDP, Cisco Secure Client, Google BeyondCorp Remote Access and Jamf Connect, whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Cloudflare Access and Cisco Umbrella. See our Netskope Private Access vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange 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.
