No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Netskope Private Access comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (6th)
Check Point Harmony SASE (f...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (8th), Firewalls (22nd), Anti-Malware Tools (13th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (7th), ZTNA (3rd), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Netskope Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
16th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.6%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 6.9%, up from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 2.3%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
iboss3.6%
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)6.9%
Netskope Private Access2.3%
Other87.2%
ZTNA as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.
Nasseer Qureshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Pre Sales Consultant at Redington Group
Delivers seamless and secure remote access while enhancing security posture
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) offers strong features, but there are areas that could be improved. One area for improvement is integration with third-party identity providers. It works with standard SAML and SSO, but we would prefer deeper integrations with solutions such as Ping for more advanced identity-based policies. Additionally, a mobile-specific client or lightweight agent would be helpful for securing access from smartphones, especially in BYOD environments. We would appreciate more granular reporting and analytics, including better drill-down capabilities to investigate specific users or app activity. The logs are comprehensive, but filtering them can sometimes feel messy. The user interface on the management portal could be more intuitive, especially when managing multiple sites or remote offices. Some of the policy configuration steps are nested and could be streamlined.
Prathamesh Samant - PeerSpot reviewer
Presales Manager at a manufacturing company with 201-500 employees
Has ensured secure remote access through real-time device checks and policy controls
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support, it is quite easy to integrate. Wherever customization is needed, it depends on the openness of the application being integrated with. If the other application has an open architecture where you have easy API integrations, then it becomes easier. However, in some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope. They can introduce the DLP feature for Netskope Private Access. Zscaler has that DLP feature. It is in their roadmap, but currently, they don't have it. If they have data protection or data loss prevention within their NPA, that would be a significant advantage.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"The students were always protected, and the content filtering worked very well, seeming to work better than other products we had tried previously."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"Review of exported and imported packages and protection and content filtering have been useful."
"The reports give a simple overview of the traffic pattern within the organization."
"Check Point provides high-quality technical support. The support was pretty quick."
"It is a very stable solution."
"The integration that this solution has with the different routers or perimeter equipment is exceptional."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"The features are excellent, particularly the user interface and user accessibility."
"Harmony Mobile has enabled us to provide the necessary information for the evaluation and analysis of the risks, threats, and security vulnerabilities to which mobile devices are currently exposed, as well as the technology used to address these risks."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"In the firewall, we don't have a user-based policies list, and we can't create them. Netskope helps us to create user-based policies. For example, if there are specific teams like HR or more than nine teams, and we want logs from access over particular URLs, and we don't want to allow that specific URL for certain users, we can create these policies in Netskope. It's handy, easy to use for new users, and has a cool GUI interface. We can create multiple policies, and as for the proxy, it's a leading solution."
"Netskope Private Access covers a wide range of use cases with solutions for client-server and server-to-client connectivity patterns."
"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"The most valuable feature is being able to see who is accessing the application, whether it is a managed device or a bring-your-own-device published by Netskope."
"They do one software or one platform; they are the leading CASBY platform in the world, and what they can do, nobody can do."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"There are several valuable features, like advanced security protections, especially the DLP (Data Loss Protection), and there's also browser and web filtering, or content filtering for our users to protect them when accessing certain links or websites, ensuring their security and permission."
 

Cons

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"Currently, I am not able to define a different country or location, which can result in negative experiences as the tool is being recognized by websites and this can make it difficult to access them or force me to disable the program temporarily."
"The platform still lacks relevant dashboards and the ability to customize them based on our needs."
"The main problem with Harmony Connect is that, because it's in a new category of offerings by Check Point, there's very little marketing of the product so far, and this means that many potential users don't even know this kind of solution is available. There are also few testimonials or case studies talking about people who have used the product and fell in love with it, for example."
"Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity."
"Offering in-app explanations detailing what each feature does, its benefits and potential use cases can help users better understand and utilize the tool to its full potential."
"It would be nice to have a notification sound when Perimeter81 disconnects, as I sometimes don't notice when the icon shows that it's disconnected, and I end up wasting time waiting for my browser to load a page that shows an error, usually error 404."
"The complex initial setup phase of the product is an area that can be improved"
"Branding could be better."
"Netskope Private Access could improve by enhancing visibility of user performance and application performance. It should also integrate wider DLP and inspection engines on private access traffic."
"The ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."
"The main challenge we are facing across various Trust Network Access (TNA) technologies, including Netskope, is their inability to support broadcast applications or those relying on broadcasting protocols."
"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."
"The solution needs to develop faster features. Its interoperability feature is not working. It takes six months to one year for any product to implement the improvements. However, the process should be faster to implement the changes quickly."
"Netskope Private Access only supports TCP and UDP ports and does not support ICMP or ping."
"In some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope."
"Netskope Private Access allows mapping only one DNS server. If a user uses a secondary DNS on-premises, Netskope fails to disconnect them. This is an issue that needs to be addressed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"Regarding pricing, I can say that the more the number of users, the less they have to pay."
"The cost of the solution's licenses depends on the particular use cases."
"Perimeter 81 charges separately for gateways and VPN connectivity, but compared to Azure, it seemed more reasonable."
"The pricing is good, especially when you compare it to other firewall or UTM solutions from FortiGate or SonicWall, where you would have to invest about four hundred thousand rupees for 100 users over a three-year period."
"I consider the product to be a medium-priced solution. There are no additional costs attached to the tool."
"Annual licenses cost $30 to $40 each."
"The solution is priced appropriately considering its uses. For an essential license, a user pays only 30 USD per month. For an enterprise version, the prices can be negotiated with the company."
"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."
"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."
"It is not the most expensive option, being more affordable than Zscaler, but it's also not the most budget-friendly choice available."
"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
Construction Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business53
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
I think iboss could be improved by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible, and simplifying troubl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
I use iboss as a cloud-based secure web gateway to provide secure internet access, web filtering, and protect remote ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
My experience with iboss's pricing structure, setup cost, and licensing model has been positive, straightforward, and...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Harmony Connect?
I am not aware of the pricing, setup cost, and licensing, but I would say the setup cost is our resource, and we have...
What needs improvement with Harmony Connect?
When I'm raising a ticket for Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81), it's a bit technical for non-technica...
What is your primary use case for Harmony Connect?
I have experience with this product as a user. Currently, the Check Point product that I worked with mostly was the F...
What needs improvement with Netskope Private Access?
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support...
What is your primary use case for Netskope Private Access?
For secure remote access for people who are working out of the office, remotely, or traveling, my clients mostly use ...
What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Private Access?
I work with a system integrator, and nowadays, we have all these solutions in our portfolio for our customers. At tha...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Check Point Quantum SASE
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith
Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Netskope Private Access and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.