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 solution is stable."
"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 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 features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"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."
"Netskope is a one-platform security product that provides security functions. It is the most advantageous product in the Japanese market."
"It's a comprehensive security portfolio solution."
"It's one of the top-ranking solutions in the market, and it's very responsive. We are using Netskope, and Netskope provides a load of features for SQL, STP, and traffic control."
"They are very good at CASB as compared to other players."
"Technical support is good. They are very helpful and quick to resolve any issues we have."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"The quarantine feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The tool's most valuable feature is reporting. It helps us understand what's going on in our environment."
"From stability and availability standpoints, it is pretty good."
"The product is stable."
"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."
"They could improve their mobile agents as they have some limitations."
"I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution."
"The solution is still pretty new to the CASB environment."
"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 and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"Netskope needs to improve its stability."
"The configuration in the cloud model could be improved upon."
"I would like to have an identity theft protection function."
"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."
"The TLS encryption needs to be improved. It's not state of the art."
"Proofpoint Cloud App Security Broker should be cheaper."
"They are priced significantly higher and less cost-effective than alternative options."
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 Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, 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 and Skyhigh Security. 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.