We performed a comparison between Netskope and Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, 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."
"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 solution is stable."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is protection."
"The initial setup of Netskope CASB is easy, it is not complex."
"It's a comprehensive security portfolio solution."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"From stability and availability standpoints, it is pretty good."
"The tool's most valuable feature is reporting. It helps us understand what's going on in our environment."
"The quarantine feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The product is stable."
"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."
"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 configuration in the cloud model could be improved upon."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"Netskope needs to improve its stability."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"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 product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"I think some of the hiccups that we had were with the number of domains that we had and how that had to be implemented in Proofpoint."
"They are priced significantly higher and less cost-effective than alternative options."
"The TLS encryption needs to be improved. It's not state of the art."
"Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker should be cheaper."
More Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews while Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is ranked 14th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 4 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is rated 8.0. 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 Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker writes "A highly stable spam filtering solution that can be managed and used by a large number of users". Netskope is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Skyhigh Security, whereas Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Skyhigh Security, Zscaler Internet Access and Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection. See our Netskope vs. Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker report.
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.