Netskope vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 14, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Lookout
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
12th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
18th
Average Rating
7.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (24th), Mobile Data Protection (7th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (18th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (43rd), Mobile Threat Defense (2nd), ZTNA as a Service (13th), ZTNA (10th)
Netskope
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
4th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
3rd
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (3rd), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (4th), ZTNA as a Service (2nd)
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the market share of Lookout is 0.1% and it decreased by 67.6% compared to the previous year. The market share of Netskope is 15.1% and it increased by 2.5% compared to the previous year. The market share of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 24.2% and it increased by 5.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
Unique Categories:
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
0.4%
Mobile Data Protection
7.1%
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
21.2%
 

Featured Reviews

AP
May 23, 2023
User-focused design makes it easy to understand, and operations running in background provide peace of mind
In any of the discussions that we've had with their technical teams, they have been very knowledgeable and helpful in certain aspects. They have a lot of partnerships, from what we can tell, and that does start to make the waters a little bit murky. They have third parties that provide functionality and there is a concern that we're going to be bounced around between five different groups to get help for a problem. If you describe it incorrectly, all of a sudden you're with a group that can't help you and they have to forward you to another group. They have been very responsive and super helpful when it comes to any of the issues we've identified. Still, that concern about being bounced around between multiple partners detracts from the overall experience.
DZ
Jun 28, 2022
Feature-rich, performs well, reliable, and is simple to implement
Netskope CASB is used in the company for a few shared IT cloud connections. We are consultants. We manage the projects for implementation. We work with the customers Netskope CASB has improved our organization's security rather than its functionality. The most useful feature of this solution is…
Nikolay Dimitrov - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 6, 2022
Supports auto-scaling for mobile users and provides the ability to create custom threat signatures
It can be improved if some customers want to use Prisma Access only for web traffic. Currently, it is a bit limited. Zscaler works better for web traffic. Zscaler's agent application on your computer can configure the proxy settings automatically, whereas Palo Alto's GlobalProtect agent is only a VPN solution. You can't use it also as a secure gateway agent to force the computer to have the settings to send the data to Prisma Access. They suggest using other techniques to force the computer to use Prisma Access for a secure web gateway solution. So, Zscaler is more like a secure web gateway, and Prisma Access is more like a full VPN solution. I see the limitations of both vendors. Palo Alto needs to improve the GlobalProtect agent to work as a secure web gateway agent, not only as a VPN agent because some companies would want only a secure gateway. They wouldn't want a full VPN. So, Palo Alto has to make the VPN agent work as a secure web gateway agent for those customers who want only the secure web gateway solution. Other vendors' agents, including ForcePoint which I don't like at all, can do that. One feature that I find missing in Prisma Access, as well as Palo Alto firewalls, is that they can't insert the 644 header. I want to be able to see the IP address of the users basically. My understanding is that almost no firewall can do this. It is not only Palo Alto, but it would be good to have this feature. The only vendor that I know can insert it is FortiGate, but with them, many other things don't work.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution is stable."
"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."
"They are very good at CASB as compared to other players."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"Their technical support is very good."
"Amazing reporting and tracking mechanisms."
"The detection capability is very nice and lightweight."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to join your network and provide access through the VPN."
"Prisma Access protects all app traffic, so that users can gain access to all apps and that's very important because we need to be able to access everything. It also allows us to access non-web apps; anything internal that we need access to, we can access."
"The always-on feature is fantastic for the users. They don't have to think about it. When they go to a coffee shop to do work, there's no need to remember to toggle the VPN on. We'll protect them. URL filtering is the same at home as it is in the office."
"We're now able to go after contracts that require a Zero Trust solution and Prisma's other technology solutions."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"Prisma's most valuable feature would be its ability to identify bad or risky configurations."
"Its hands-off security and the fact that we don't have to maintain it are the most valuable features."
"There is a system for monitoring the traffic. You can monitor the traffic of the connected people and point out any issues on the connection part."
 

Cons

"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."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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."
"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 configuration in the cloud model could be improved upon."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
"It should have user behavior analysis and diverse analysis."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"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."
"I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution."
"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."
"I would like to see better pricing and an easier logging process. Also, if there was a way to log a global log, everything could go onto the system. It would be better if there was a third log, otherwise one would have to do everything manually."
"From any improvement perspective, the product's compatibility issues with Linux need to be resolved."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks should consolidate the portals into a single portal. It is slow and takes more than ten seconds to load a page."
"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."
"When we deploy firewall rules via Panorama, we find it's a little bit slow. We have a global environment and might have 100 gateways or VPNs in the cloud. When we deploy something, it tries to deploy it one-by-one, and that can be slow."
"There should be a dedicated portal or SASE-based solution. They're trying to add a plugin but it needs a dedicated portal because it is now an enterprise solution for multiple organizations. People should be able to directly log in to a dedicated page for Prisma Access, rather than going into a Panorama plugin, and always having to update the plugin."
"If you compare Prisma SaaS against other products, such as Cloud Log, it's a little bit tricky to understand, but it offers different functionality that other products don't have. From a user usability point of view, you need some training for this product, as an admin, you need a couple of demos."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing costs are good. Prisma has much more options and support for security, but it has a higher cost. For example, Lookout costs 2/3rd of Prisma's licensing price."
"In terms of feature performance versus cost, they're a good value."
"Lookout is definitely on the lower end when it comes to price point and that seems to be the only differentiator. The technology is in place in this space and it's really about who is coming in at the better price point now."
"The pricing is fair; it's comparable to our previous solution, and we carried out multiple POCs and POVs (proof of value). The product is worth the money we pay for it."
"The price is in the middle range compared to other solutions."
"Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is competitive."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case."
"I recall that the price was considerably cheaper than that of Zscaler. It was around 60,000 AUD for 1,000 users per year and included some training and some premier support offerings. If we wanted to take advantage of the CASB capabilities, then there was an additional subscription fee, for which we didn't have the budget. On price, I would give Netskope a three or four out of five because it's quite expensive, but it offers a lot of value."
"I rate the product's price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is low price."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution, especially when compared to other solutions like Cisco. There are no additional charges apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution."
"Prisma Access is one of the best compared to other products on the market. The cost is favorable, and Palo Alto provides a simple architecture, so I recommend the solution to anyone using a different product. There are no hidden costs besides the license; what you see is what you get."
"We have to pay additional costs for maintenance and support services."
"The solution is expensive."
"In terms of pricing, considering that it is a two or three years old solution, they should apply big discounts for the next two or three years. This approach will be better for them to capture the market."
"The price has been good for the ROI during these difficult times for the cruise industry. There are no hidden costs; what the product offers is what you get."
"I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing."
"The initial prices of Prisma Access were okay. But as soon as you start deploying Palo Alto gear, the support prices and the recurring prices, which are the major operational costs, tend to increase over time."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
5%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lookout?
The licensing costs are good. Prisma has much more options and support for security, but it has a higher cost. For ex...
What needs improvement with Lookout?
The solution could improve identity integration as well. Zero trust, it's a good start as a zero-trust solution. More...
Which is better, Zscaler internet access or Netsckope CASB?
We researched Netskope but ultimately chose Zscaler. Netskope is a cloud access security broker that helps identify ...
What do you like most about Netskope CASB?
The product's analytics part is pretty fine.
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What do you like most about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
As compared to other solutions, Prisma Access is much cheaper. It is probably 30% to 40% cheaper than other solutions...
 

Also Known As

CipherCloud
Netskope CASB
Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Prisma Access, GlobalProtect, Palo Alto GlobalProtect Mobile Security Manager, Prisma SaaS by Palo Alto Networks, Prisma Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NetApp, Genomic Health, Caterpillar, Apollo, Pandora, Continental Resources, Fractal, infinera, Tesla
Concord Hospital, State of Colorado, Essilor International, RheinLand Versicherungsgruppe, University of Westminster, Universidade Nove de Julho, SPAR Austria, CAME Group, ZipRealty, Greenhill & Co., IKT Agder, Aviva Stadium, Animal Logic, Management & Training Corporation, Brigham Young University Hawaii, School District of Chilliwack
Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.