We performed a comparison between Netskope and Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker 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."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 solution is stable."
"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."
"Netskope is a one-platform security product that provides security functions. It is the most advantageous product in the Japanese market."
"Their technical support is very good."
"I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust."
"Amazing reporting and tracking mechanisms."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"The solution offers a better understanding of the real scenario and identifies the cloud apps that are being utilized."
"It has hundreds of features and many of them are useful."
"The tool's most valuable feature is reporting. It helps us understand what's going on in our environment."
"From stability and availability standpoints, it is pretty good."
"The product is stable."
"The quarantine feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"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."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"The configuration in the cloud model could be improved upon."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"They could improve their mobile agents as they have some limitations."
"Netskope needs to improve its stability."
"The TLS encryption needs to be improved. It's not state of the art."
"Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker should be cheaper."
"I think some of the hiccups that we had were with the number of domains that we had and how that had to be implemented in Proofpoint."
"They are priced significantly higher and less cost-effective than alternative options."
More Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews while Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is ranked 14th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 4 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is rated 8.0. 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 Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker writes "A highly stable spam filtering solution that can be managed and used by a large number of users". 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 Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. See our Netskope vs. Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker 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.