We compared Cato Networks and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: When comparing Cato Networks and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato Networks is praised for its easy setup, simplicity, and speed. It offers useful features like always-on VPN, web filtering, and antivirus capabilities. However, it lacks advanced networking features and a web application firewall. In contrast, Prisma Access is highly regarded for its user-friendly interface, security features, and integration capabilities. It may be difficult to use and configure, and its pricing is considered higher. Customer service and support for both products have received mixed feedback, with potential for improvement in response time and expertise for Prisma Access.
"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."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"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."
"What I found most helpful in Cato Networks is that it works out of the box. One of its main advantages is that it's a simple product to deploy. You subscribe, and you're ready to run."
"The product is very simple, and everything can be done very quickly."
"The most valuable features of Cato Networks are the always-on VPN for remote workers and centralized management. Additionally, web filtering and antivirus are good."
"We appreciate the optimization and acceleration of the performance of SDP users."
"It is a stable solution...it is a scalable solution."
"The feature that I find to be the most valuable is the bandwidth aggregation."
"The most valuable feature is that it also works as a next-gen firewall because it has security features."
"I haven't had any trouble, and practically forget that I'm using it."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is a seamless solution."
"The solution has all its capabilities in a single cloud delivery platform which is great and it provides overall good protection."
"Prisma's most valuable feature would be its ability to identify bad or risky configurations."
"The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being user-friendly."
"Palo Alto Firewall is one of the best firewalls in the world."
"Prisma Access gives us security from a single point. It controls mobile users and determines how secure their networks will be, including from where they will get internet access. We can optimize things and add security profiles centrally."
"The Autonomous Digital Experience Management (ADEM) offered by Palo Alto is a good reporting tool. It gives insights into how things are going within the network. It takes all the data from the users' endpoints and does an analysis, and it suggests changes as well."
"The visibility perspective is pretty cool. If I want to know how much data is being used for a specific project, I can look at how much data has been used, from which region, and which users have been connected. That visibility is very good so that I can see how many licenses we have and how many are used."
"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 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"
"I would like to see better integration with identity providers."
"The solution is not cheap."
"They should add more sophisticated security features. It should also be integrated into the cloud."
"Cato Networks security could be better."
"I am located in South Korea, and I can say that most people here have no idea about Cato Networks. I think Cato Networks should promote its network services in various countries."
"Cato Networks could improve their intrusion detection. There is not a lot in place."
"For a packaged solution, needing external intervention or a system integrator to get other features not offered by Cato Networks could be an area for improvement. Cato Networks does what it's meant to do and is even overstretching capabilities when introducing new features. The product can only have very few features added on top of what its currently doing. Managed service providers can deliver the extra features you'd need. It's a set of managed services, and what Cato Networks does is very comprehensive. So, for the time being, when the actual incarnation of the SASE solution is deployed, Cato Networks is a very effective product. Naturally, technology will evolve, so everybody knows that in three, four, or five years, there will be a new kid on the block, a new game. Still, at the moment, Cato Networks only needs to improve a little regarding SASE delivery. The product is doing very well, but one feature the Cato Networks team is doing right is preparing for the future through deploying the SSE 360, so the security service is at that edge. It's an excellent strategy to prepare for the future. SSE 360 is what Cato Networks should invest in the most to keep prospering."
"They can't do one-to-one NAT (Network Address Translation) in AP (their access point), and that is something that Palo Alto can do."
"One thing that would help is if we could get a guide. With Cisco, for example, you can just type the problem regarding your Cisco product and you will easily get your solution. In Palo Alto, however, it's not easy to find the solutions."
"Its integration with non-Palo Alto products can be improved. Currently, it is easy to integrate it with other Palo Alto products such as Cortex XDR. It integrates well with other Palo Alto products. A major part of our network is based on Palo Alto products, but for those companies that use multi-vendor products in their infrastructure, Palo Alto should optimize the integration of Prisma Access with the network devices from other vendors."
"Dependencies of applications sometimes is a bit confusing."
"When we deploy firewall rules via Panorama, we find it's a little bit slow. We have a global environment and might have 100 gateways or VPNs in the cloud. When we deploy something, it tries to deploy it one-by-one, and that can be slow."
"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."
"I would like to see better pricing and an easier logging process. Also, if there was a way to log a global log, everything could go onto the system. It would be better if there was a third log, otherwise one would have to do everything manually."
"Their next release should provide solutions for the mobile environment."
"Palo Alto needs to improve the GlobalProtect agent to work as a secure web gateway agent, not only as a VPN agent because some companies would want only a secure gateway. They wouldn't want a full VPN. So, Palo Alto has to make the VPN agent work as a secure web gateway agent for those customers who want only the secure web gateway solution."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cato SASE Cloud Platform is ranked 6th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 21 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 3rd in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 57 reviews. Cato SASE Cloud Platform is rated 8.8, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cato SASE Cloud Platform writes "Useful remote worker VPN, centralized management, and simple on-boarding process". 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". Cato SASE Cloud Platform is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco SD-WAN, Fortinet FortiGate, VMware SD-WAN and Perimeter 81, whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Netskope , Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors, best ZTNA as a Service vendors, and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.
