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.
"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."
"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 feature of Netskope is protection."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"Its deployment is very easy and quick. Their technical support is also very good."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"Netskope is a really good product. I cannot segregate which features are the most valuable. We find most of the features to be valuable. It gives us what we are looking for."
"Security is absolutely spot-on, really top-notch. It's the result of all the components that come together, such as the HIP [Host Information Profile] and components like Forcepoint, providing end-user content inspection, and antivirus. It incorporates DLP features and that's fantastic because Prisma Access makes sure that all of the essential prerequisites are in place before a user can log in or can be tunneled into."
"You have the ability to create your own expressions for your data. Palo Alto understands that DLP is not the same for all consumers. You might have a particular need to fulfill, and they give you the opportunity to create a custom expression to match the specific format that you have. For a confidential file property that you have in your files, you can add a metadata field. It gives you that opportunity to create that."
"The most valuable feature of Prisma Cloud-native, in my opinion, is that it assists in identifying, analyzing, and remediating vulnerabilities."
"The scalability of the solution is excellent."
"The solution also provides traffic analysis, threat prevention, URL filtering, and segmentation. That combination is important because it enhances the protection and makes the traffic more secure. It also keeps things more up-to-date, enabling us to deal with more of the current threats."
"The remediation process is easy compared to other platforms."
"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."
"The stacked policies, event policies, and routing policies are easy to understand for someone with general knowledge."
"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 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"
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
"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."
"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"
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"The configuration in the cloud model could be improved upon."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The initial setup is complex and should be simplified."
"There should be some granular custom roles that are not available. However, this is on the road map. There are many devices that do not have the Zero Trust feature and other enhancements available which they should have."
"Their next release should provide solutions for the mobile environment."
"The product's current price is an area of shortcoming where improvements are required."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"The cloud setup is straightforward, and the onboarding process is much better, but the on-premises initial setup is slightly complex."
"When it comes to integration mechanisms, Prisma SaaS does not support reverse proxy type of integrations."
"There is room for improvement in the multi-environment visibility, especially around containers."
"We are using the SaaS offering. We use our applications for microservices. We use Twistlock to scan containers, and it displays these results in Prisma, which is a good feature because we can see vulnerabilities with respect to these containers. We can see everything in a very detailed manner. However, when you have different environments for a single application, such as DEV, QA, PROD, and TEST, all these environments run multiple containers, which can lead to a very high number of containers. In such a scenario, it shows you the alerts for all those containers that have vulnerabilities. If you show the results of all the containers that share the same image, it is not going to add any value. Therefore, they should narrow down the alerts based on a container. It should show information for a single container. Otherwise, the person who is looking at the results gets the impression that he has to fix all these issues. This is something that they can improve."
"The BGP filtering options on Prisma Access should be improved."
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 57 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. 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.