We performed a comparison between Lookout and Netskope based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Netskope offers a wide range of features including Azure compatibility, cloud control, and regulatory compliance for cloud apps. It also has superior integration and reporting capabilities. However, Lookout is commended for its user-friendly design, communication guidance, affordability, 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."
"The product's analytics part is pretty fine."
"The automation offered by the product is pretty solid."
"Netskope is a one-platform security product that provides security functions. It is the most advantageous product in the Japanese market."
"The initial setup of Netskope CASB is easy, it is not complex."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"In Azure, we have multiple subscriptions and with every subscription, we add some kind of instance ID. We can work with the instance ID so that we allow all of the instances containing nodules. Everything else, we block. This way, if you go to outlook.com and check your email, if you log in with your company account, the instance ID will show. The network will take action according to the instance ID and say, "You are using the enterprise email. I'll let you surf. I'll let you see your email." But when you try to log in with your own email address, like Hotmail or Gmail, the instance ID will be different. This way we are not completely blocking Outlook, but we are blocking people from accessing their Outlook. We are only allowing the enterprise-level emails, and we are not allowing user-based emails."
"It has hundreds of features and many of them are useful."
"They are very good at CASB as compared to other players."
"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."
"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."
"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"
"Technical support and the user interface could be improved."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
"Netskope CASB can improve by working more similarly to a VPN technology instead of a proxy. They then could have visibility on the endpoint device. Most clients have some tools where they check the endpoint health or other things, such as the security posture, or if they want to access the resources. For example, if they should have antivirus running, this kind of posture check should be available but it is missing."
"The configuration and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"Third party integration with other cloud applications could be improved. Sometimes the API won't be working, but Netskope is taking it seriously. They accept all the feature requests, and they are trying to provide whatever we ask from them."
"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."
Lookout is ranked 13th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 5 reviews while Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews. Lookout is rated 7.2, while Netskope is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Lookout writes "Easy to use and setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". Lookout is most compared with Check Point Harmony Mobile, Zimperium, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Netskope is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Skyhigh Security. See our Lookout vs. Netskope report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.
Hi Tim, I'm currently a student and doing research about cyber security market, may I know how do you narrow your list down to these 5 vendors?
Hi, I am working on both Skyhigh and Netskope. The both has their own unique features. List down your requirement and do the POC with the said products.
Skyhigh is efficiently handling both shadow IT and sanctioned IT applications. DLP, threat protection and access controls are the key features of skyhigh.
Netskope is good in access control.
Regards / Ramesh M
Hello,
The CASB space is booming right now. Everyone is leveraging the cloud for various reasons and having a CASB in place is paramount to security. What CASB to get is really a matter of your business requirements. What exactly are you trying to do? Do you want to get a handle on all the Shadow IT that your company is currently exposed to and set up a plan for such activity? Do you want to apply DLP policies to safeguard your data? Perhaps GDPR and other regulatory issues are forcing you to get into compliance? There are many reasons for adopting a CASB solution, the best place to start is with an Audit of your current traffic and finding out what Shadow IT is present, any related Shadow Data that needs to be monitored, and come up with a plan on how to handle SaaS apps in the cloud. The best CASB vendors out there will offer the audit service as part of the CASB solution. From there, you can design policy and stipulate what cloud apps to sanction, which ones to block, and how to coach users during any suspect activity. The end goal is to keep your users productive and happy while securing your data in cloud apps.
For an unbiased answer, I would direct you to Gartner and Forrester for reports on CASB. They will detail what the landscape looks like, who the vendors are, what the pillars of a good CASB solution should entail, as well as some features and functionality that are specific to the various CASB vendors. Gartner has a CASB overview document that is very handy and they are currently working on a magic quadrant for the existing vendors. Forrester has released a “ForresterWaveCASB” document that dives into the vendors and who they think are the best based on market presence, features, etc.
Of course, Symantec offers a CASB solution that should be added to your list of vendors for review. Do not look at a CASB vendor without looking at Symantec. Currently, Forrester ranks Symantec as the number 1 CASB vendor in the marketplace. Symantec offers the following:
· Cloud app discovery and analysis
· Data governance and protection
· Threat detection and incident response
· A CASB that integrates with Symantec DLP (the industry’s leading DLP solution)
· Integration with endpoint
· Integration with Secure Web Gateway (Blue Coat proxies are the best in the industry)
· Authentication with Symantec VIP
· Field level tokenization and encryption
· File-level encryption
Consider these questions when looking for a CASB vendor:
· What do yo udo when you need to apply consistent DLP policies to data in the cloud and on premise?
· What are your options for encrypting confidential data
· Can you safeguard against confidential data transfer to unsanctioned cloud apps or personal cloud accounts?
· Can the CASB automatically identify and respond when a user account has been compromised?
· Does the CASB automatically classify confidential data or do you have to build a system from scratch?
Netskope is really good. MCAS meets the requirements but lacking features, it is cheaper though. Depends on your requirements, netskope has an optional light weight desktop agent which makes monitoring easy.
Do you have any specific requirements?
we use ciphercloud. basically, all of them handles: office, google, & salesforce. now with the GDPR happening in our european offices they're mainly SAP & ciphercloud is the only one approved by SAP.
At the risk of giving a solution without knowing the situation, some very broadbrush advice would be to look at these vendors in this priority order. That said, given the right environment, any of them could be the best fit. CASB is not a market that is matured with standard architectures and features, so it is advisable to consider the specific requirements before making a decision. Another way to say this is there is not one that is universally superior in most situation.
1. Netskope
2. Skyhigh
3. CipherCloud
4. Bitglass
5. Microsoft Cloud App Security
The ones higher on this list tend to have a greater number of use cases where they do a good job. I don’t feel I can publish pros and cons in this forum.
We have used Skyhigh and its pretty good to handle cloud sanctioned IT applications like Office365, Google APPs and salesforce etc.
Easy to deploy, better application, device and user visibility.
No help on any of these, but thanks for the question. For a holistic approach (because anything less is insufficient), I've begun using Sophos appliances, services, and endpoint protection which all speak with each other and really fortify a network on all fronts. Services take up resources, so be sure to invest in an appliance powerful enough to serve all your endpoints effectively. Hope this helps.