We compared Netskope and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks based on our users' reviews across four parameters. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Users prefer Netskope for its advanced analytics and granular policy enforcement, while Prisma Access may be a better choice for its scalability and ease of use. Users praise Netskope for its comprehensive data protection capabilities, advanced analytics, and granular policy enforcement. However, they have expressed a desire for a more intuitive interface, better customer support, improved performance during high-traffic periods, and more comprehensive reporting capabilities. Users appreciate Prisma Access for its ease of use, scalability, and flexibility but have concerns about speed and performance, compatibility with certain applications and platforms, and customer support.
Features: Netskope offers comprehensive data protection, advanced threat protection, advanced analytics, and granular policy enforcement. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks focuses on robust security measures, advanced threat prevention, secure connectivity, scalability, and flexibility.
Pricing and ROI: Netskope is praised for its competitive pricing options and straightforward setup process, ensuring a smooth customer experience. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is affordable and provides good value for money. The setup cost is reasonable, and the licensing process is user-friendly for both products. Netskope users reported significant value and cost savings, emphasizing its effectiveness in data protection. Prisma Access users also experienced positive results, indicating a significant ROI.
Room for Improvement: Netskope could improve its interface, customer support, performance during high-traffic periods, and reporting capabilities. Prisma Access could enhance its speed and performance, compatibility with certain applications and platforms, and customer support.
Deployment and customer support: Some Netskope users found the initial setup to be simple and quick, as it only involves rolling out an agent and can be deployed on the cloud. However, others mentioned that the implementation phase can be complex and time-consuming, requiring coordination and effort. The deployment process was generally considered easy, especially for those with a networking background. Palo Alto Networks has a setup that varies in terms of ease and complexity. Some users found the initial setup to be straightforward, while others mentioned it was more complex and required help from Palo Alto or a partner. The deployment durations range from a few hours to several months, depending on factors such as the size of the environment and the number of branch offices. Users praise Netskope for their knowledge and expertise in addressing queries and concerns, emphasizing the excellent level of assistance received. Prisma Access received positive feedback for its knowledgeable and friendly staff, who efficiently address concerns and provide valuable guidance.
The summary above is based on 38 interviews we conducted with Netskope and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"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."
"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 most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"A very straightforward interface."
"The interface is good."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"The product's analytics part is pretty fine."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"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."
"The solution's most valuable features were the model's reduced complexity on the client side and its capability to provide security."
"Prisma SaaS is very easy to use; it's common sense — it's the best-in-class."
"The solution has all its capabilities in a single cloud delivery platform which is great and it provides overall good protection."
"It's great that we can make sure a machine meets the minimum requirements before users are allowed to log in."
"A feature I've found very helpful is run time security because most of the products on the market will look at security during the build time, and they don't really look at what happens once you're going into production."
"It's very stable. Sometimes after installing the boxes, we leave them for one or two years. We would just touch the box in the case of the customer needing new requirements or changes to the setup."
"It is easy to use, easy to integrate, and is stable. It's scalable as well."
"Prisma integrates well with Cortex XDR and Cortex Data Lake. My company has been also using Prisma Access in-house for nearly a year, and it integrates seamlessly."
"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."
"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"
"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."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"They could improve their mobile agents as they have some limitations."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"Netskope needs to improve its stability."
"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."
"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"
"Sometimes, we encountered a portal crash. When we told Palo Alto they said it might be the browser or cache, but I think they need to improve it on their side."
"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."
"It's not really Prisma's fault, but when you try to create exceptions you don't really have those abilities. You cannot say, on the management platform, "Hey, for these users I want to create these exceptions." That is one thing that I have gotten some complaints about, and we have faced some challenges there."
"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."
"The Cloud Management application has room for improvement. There are a lot of things on the roadmap for that application; things are going to happen soon."
"The frequency of updates could be reduced."
"Palo Alto Prisma 10 came out over a year ago. Palo Alto added this identity management feature. The legacy way Palo Alto selected which user is sitting on an IP address it passes through has been clunky."
"From any improvement perspective, the product's compatibility issues with Linux need to be resolved."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 3rd in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 56 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4. 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 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". Netskope is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella, Skyhigh Security and Cato SASE Cloud Platform, whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma SD-WAN and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. See our Netskope vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks 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.