We performed a comparison between Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Saviynt based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is the preferred product over Saviynt, based on user reviews. It is highly valued for its security features, user accessibility and performance, and integration capabilities with other platforms. It also has a fabric-type SASE-based architecture with essential features in place before user login. Prisma Access is considered one of the best products on the market, with a favorable cost and simple architecture.
"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 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 stacked policies, event policies, and routing policies are easy to understand for someone with general knowledge."
"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 most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to change the gateway. For example, if there's a problem with a specific region or vendor, we can make modifications. The solution is scalable, and there are different gateways that can be created depending on the demand."
"The protection for web-based applications was helpful for my colleagues who didn't want a particular application on their devices. And the non-web access protection was more for our developers because they were writing and building code on their computers. Prisma Access was able to protect them."
"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."
"You have the ability to create your own expressions for your data. Palo Alto understands that DLP is not the same for all consumers. You might have a particular need to fulfill, and they give you the opportunity to create a custom expression to match the specific format that you have. For a confidential file property that you have in your files, you can add a metadata field. It gives you that opportunity to create that."
"Monitoring is the most valuable feature because we can easily monitor all kinds of stuff coming over the network. We can check the dashboard and work accordingly."
"The repository has many features where you can define primary and secondary owners."
"Some of the self-service capabilities are quite powerful."
"The product has a great attestation feature."
"We have found the implementation process to be very easy."
"Considering the initial cost and the basic features, this is a good solution that provides integration with both on-premise and cloud applications."
"It is very easy to use. It addresses most of the trends in identity governance and risk management."
"Saviynt is easy to configure and manage."
"Saviynt risk-based access requests and intelligent access controls have made a significant impact on our company."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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"
"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 are using the SaaS offering. We use our applications for microservices. We use Twistlock to scan containers, and it displays these results in Prisma, which is a good feature because we can see vulnerabilities with respect to these containers. We can see everything in a very detailed manner. However, when you have different environments for a single application, such as DEV, QA, PROD, and TEST, all these environments run multiple containers, which can lead to a very high number of containers. In such a scenario, it shows you the alerts for all those containers that have vulnerabilities. If you show the results of all the containers that share the same image, it is not going to add any value. Therefore, they should narrow down the alerts based on a container. It should show information for a single container. Otherwise, the person who is looking at the results gets the impression that he has to fix all these issues. This is something that they can improve."
"The licensing model isn't flexible enough. It's an all-or-nothing model. Other providers in the market allow you to buy modules or add-ons separately. With Prisma Access, you have to purchase the same module for all users."
"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."
"The tools' scalability is subject to some limitations when done on-premise due to the need for additional licenses. However, in other scenarios, increasing scalability involves expanding infrastructure to accommodate more third-party VPN access. It is scalable as long as you pay the money. Also, it needs to improve security."
"Their next release should provide solutions for the mobile environment."
"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."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required. The solution's price should be lowered."
"When it comes to the VPN, it uses the global protect VPN functionality to connect remotely, but it has a feature limitation for assigning multiple IP sub-links to different user groups. It would be much better if we are able to assign the current IP blocks for the sub-links based on the user groups."
"It is time-consuming to troubleshoot issues."
"The technical support team's response time could be improved."
"In terms of improvement, it's really just a matter of them getting more mature. It's a relatively new solution and they probably need to streamline a few of the processes as they mature. But there are not too many problems."
"The company needs to do more to establish standard practices within the product itself that are common in the industry."
"The custom application integration is a little complex, and this tool doesn't provide so many plugins or additional applications."
"The biggest drawback is that for every change you want to make, you have to go back to them and ask for it."
"According to feedback I've received, some users prefer SailPoint over Saviynt in real complex environments. SailPoint has its provisioning platform. Complex integrations may pose challenges in scenarios like a large bank with thousands of users, making SailPoint a preferred choice for some."
"The UI doesn’t enhance the user experience."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 3rd in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 58 reviews while Saviynt is ranked 7th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 21 reviews. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2, while Saviynt is rated 7.4. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Saviynt writes "Used for IAM, IGA, MFA, SSO, and access management". Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Netskope , Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Prisma SD-WAN, whereas Saviynt is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Microsoft Entra ID, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Okta Workforce Identity. See our Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs. Saviynt report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors.
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.