We performed a comparison between CloudLock and Lookout 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 appears to be the preferred option when compared to CloudLock, with users citing its comprehensive features, superior client size and architecture, and compatibility with Azure instance IDs. The platform also offers better reporting, website classification, regulatory compliance, and return on investment. While CloudLock is user-friendly, some users have experienced issues with false positives, complexity, and customer support.
"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."
"I like CloudLock because when data gets sent out, I do not want it to get out of the environment. In today's world, a lot of users will remotely use the application. It screens all of the sensitive data. That data will really be as part of the environment that you do not want it to be part of. CloudLock is protection for sensitive data."
"The solution is very stable and reliable."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"Its deployment is very easy and quick. Their technical support is also very good."
"The automation offered by the product is pretty solid."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"It's a comprehensive security portfolio solution."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"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."
"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 solution needs to have better integration capabilities. I have a lot of customers asking about how they can integrate it better."
"The only improvement is that it has to be a bigger part of an end-user device. It should look at how endpoints appear on the EDR rather than creating a separate agent. We have to integrate the source code into the system endpoint and make it an agent."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"Technical support and the user interface could be improved."
"It needed some fine-tuning on core business sites that we used, which were sensitive to what we term a man-in-the-middle certificate by design. Some sites were not tolerant because they presented as potentially malicious. So, we just had to make some tweaks so that it would bypass or interpret it."
"The solution is still pretty new to the CASB environment."
"They could add endpoint security features."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"The initial setup is complex and should be simplified."
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
Earn 20 points
CloudLock is ranked 18th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) while Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews. CloudLock is rated 7.8, while Netskope is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CloudLock writes "Screens sensitive data but it should be a bigger part of an end-user device". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". CloudLock is most compared with Cisco Umbrella and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, 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 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.
