Cisco Secure Access vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway comparison

Cisco Secure Access vs. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Download the complete report

Helped 885,311 peers since 2012

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

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.5%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Access is 4.0%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is 2.4%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
iboss	2.5%
Cisco Secure Access	4.0%
Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway	2.4%
Other	91.1%

Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851

Managing Director

Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment

I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.

Read full review

Kartik Amin

Network Operations Engineer at Redex IT Limited

Secure access has unified zero trust and web protection while AI assistance automates tasks

From a feature perspective, I have not experienced any issues, drawbacks, or shortcomings. However, the cost of Cisco's products and licensing is high. My clients usually prefer cheaper options if possible. Mid-size or smaller businesses typically cannot afford Cisco Secure Access. Additionally, there is a steep learning curve, as it is very intensive. Someone with significant knowledge can work on it, but a new professional would have to spend considerable time to get accustomed to it. It is hard to find engineers who can work on it. Overall, we get what we pay for, as it is a pretty good feature and service. The pricing of Cisco's products and licensing is higher than competitors. If they could be more reasonable, that would help. The support offered for two years also has higher costs. Overall, the client's IT budget gets affected. It was challenging to learn because, as mentioned, it has a significant learning curve and requires considerable training to become proficient.

Read full review

Ernst (Eric) Goldman

Owner at Antares Joint Development

Designed to enforce architecture governance, ensuring traceable SaaS traffic

Netskope provides vigorous policy enforcement for SaaS platforms based on how we configure it, but its vulnerability management and threat intelligence capabilities could be stronger. We rely on external sources to become aware of vulnerabilities in major SaaS platforms, which highlights a gap. It would be beneficial if Netskope offered more robust vulnerability management or integrated threat intelligence through in-house development or partnerships. This would allow for a better policy setup without needing external threat intelligence to configure Netskope. Adding these features would enhance its overall value. I would suggest making some minor improvements to the interface to make it more intuitive, but those are primarily cosmetic. In terms of actual features, the only significant enhancement I could think of, besides better threat intelligence, would be for Netskope to assess the general SaaS landscape. This could include a scorecard showing the security posture of various SaaS platforms based on their track record with breaches and vulnerabilities. I understand this could create friction with SaaS providers if some receive poor scores, which might impact their relationship with Netskope. If Netskope were to harness machine learning more effectively and share those models transparently with enterprise customers, this could include making traffic data they already collect available for deeper analytics, allowing customers to gain better insights into employee traffic patterns. It could also assist with network operations by helping to fine-tune performance based on traffic flow, even though the primary purpose of analyzing that data is security-related. Providing more advanced analytics using existing data could significantly enhance its value to enterprises.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."

"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."

"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."

"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."

"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."

"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."

More iboss pros

"Cisco Secure Access has definitely helped our organization, cutting incident response time at least in half and giving us analytics that let us quickly identify devices and users so everything from headquarters contacting the base to the on-site tech removing a rogue device from the classroom network is much quicker."

"The firewall section for IDP is the most used for remote sites. It fits better with all the data we're collecting from the protection site and the information that we provide to another customer."

"I rate the stability of Cisco Secure Access as ten out of ten."

"The feature I like the most about Cisco Secure Access is the whole concept of zero trust, as it is exactly what we need and I believe that Cisco Secure Access is the future of cybersecurity."

"We have a dedicated account team, so we've got all the people we need to engage with if there's an issue."

"I consider the most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Access to be that it merged everything into one dashboard, the Cisco Secure Access dashboard."

"The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Access is the VPN, which I find very easy to use."

"Since I started using Cisco Secure Access, I have noticed positive impacts on my organization."

More Cisco Secure Access pros

"It is for secure web trafficking, and it is doing what it needs to do. It allows customers to consolidate and eliminate multiple technologies onto Netskope and just kind of turn the dial and use more features, such as CASB, VPN. SWG is another feature. You can monitor and govern all the traffic."

"The solution has some useful features, such as microservices. They have sandboxing that allows the prevention, encryption, and remote browser isolation."

"It allows customers to consolidate and eliminate multiple technologies onto Netskope and just kind of turn the dial and use more features, such as CASB, VPN, and SWG, and you can monitor and govern all the traffic."

"We've found the solution to be quite stable."

"The solution's CASB, DLP, and threat protection features are very good."

"We can connect cloud apps and monitor them."

"All our customers use multiple data and want to protect that by preventing data leakage and that's what it does."

"Prevents data leakage and protects data."

More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway pros

Cons

"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."

"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

"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 when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."

"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."

"Its pricing could be better."

"The reporting feature needs improvement."

More iboss cons

"In general, I think Cisco Secure Access can be improved. I have worked a lot with Cisco Secure Connect, which is very intuitive and easy. With Cisco Secure Access, things are very complicated."

"We did run into an issue with URL filtering where it would not filter a site properly. It took months to resolve by Cisco, but that is the only hiccup I would say there has been."

"Cisco Secure Access has impacted our help desk ticket volume and end-user experience because sometimes users encounter issues. Since we have many features activated, users sometimes cannot connect or attempt to connect multiple times, which generates service desk tickets."

"However, the cost of Cisco's products and licensing is high, and mid-size or smaller businesses typically cannot afford Cisco Secure Access."

"When you have planned works in your data center, I think you need to carry out some post-checks to ensure we are not affected as users."

"It is confusing. When you look at the prices, you have different licensing and years of licensing that you have to purchase. Additionally, it's unclear what service you get from those licenses regarding end-user support. We have a representative who has to walk me through it every time."

"The ease of managing Cisco Secure Access is quite challenging; it is not user-friendly, and we have to involve too much time to review the information available in the dashboard, which can be confusing."

"The way that we're using Cisco Secure Access today, it doesn't scale with the growing needs of our organization, however, if we leveraged more of the cloud services, it would fit better."

More Cisco Secure Access cons

"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."

"The solution could improve the features for Zero Trust Network Access. They should add more security components to that module."

"Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats."

"They should work on marketing material to put out their work with a little more effort."

"The initial setup is a bit complex in that it takes a lot of time. In order to get the product to work as you need it to, there is a lot of configuration required."

"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."

"Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway needs to integrate IoT, which can help to control devices."

"Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats."

More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."

"For what you get, it's a fair price in comparison to other products."

"The pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access have been very competitive compared to other platforms. I believe that if Cisco continues to improve costs or offers something similar to a Cisco credit, it would attract more customers."

"We pay a licensing fee of $10,000 on a yearly basis."

"The product is cheap."

"The license model is based on the number of users. You have the possibility to have 10,000 users if you wish."

"The solution's overall cost is cheaper than regular web security solutions."

"The price is average. Because the license is user-based, you can increase it as per the user quantity."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	27

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	3

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...

What is your primary use case for iboss?

Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Access?

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access is that it is part of our security ...

What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?

Cisco Secure Access has many features, and I want to clarify whether the discussion pertains to Cisco ISE or the Cisc...

What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Secure Access?

Cisco Secure Access always requires monitoring for updates and signatures, similar to a health check, but not intensi...

Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?

Netscope, Zscaler if they continue route they are on now. FIrewalls needs great deal of automation on each end, datac...

Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?

Those firewalls that allow extend the perimeter. Nowadays, there is a issue with the static perimeter and all is goin...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway?

It is fairly priced.

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Twingate vs iboss

Compared 3% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 25% of the time

Netskope vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 7% of the time

Absolute Secure Access vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 2% of the time

More Cisco Secure Access Competitors

Fortinet FortiGate vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 8% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 8% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 8% of the time

Prisma Access Browser vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 6% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 6% of the time

More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway Competitors

Product Reports

iboss

Download iboss product report

Cisco Secure Access

Download Cisco Secure Access product report

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Download Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway product report

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Cisco Secure Access is a comprehensive Security Service Edge (SSE) solution (a key component of a SASE solution) that addresses the complexities of securing a hybrid enterprise. Cloud-delivered and grounded in zero trust, it delivers a unique blend of user simplicity and IT efficiency for frictionless, secure access to all applications—SaaS (with gen AI), private apps, and the internet—regardless of user location or device. Secure Access protects users, data, and devices against relentless, sophisticated, and constantly evolving threats including AI-driven attacks and identity breaches.

Provides all core SSE components (ZTNA, SWG, CASB, and FWaaS) plus extended capabilities.

Includes VPN-as-a-Service (VPNaaS), data loss prevention (DLP), AI Assistant, visibility/control/guardrails for generative AI use, digital experience monitoring (DEM), reserved IP, remote browser isolation (RBI), DNS-layer security, flexible security enforcement (in cloud or on-premises), policy verification, and more.
Protects users as they seamlessly access resources and apps with no extra steps needed, regardless of protocol, port, or level of customization
Simplifies IT operations through a single client, single dashboard, single license, and unified policies.
Lowers risk with least privilege, granular controls backed with unmatched threat intelligence of Cisco Talos.
Eases interoperability with other products from Cisco and third-party vendors with common administrative controls, data structures, and policy management.

Robust integrations

Integrates with Cisco Identity Intelligence to protect against the startling increase in identity-based attacks.
Integrates with many SAML Identity Providers (IDPs) such as AD, Azure AD, Okta, Ping, etc.
Integrates with Cisco offerings including SD-WAN, Splunk, XDR, Thousand Eyes, third party technologies such as Menlo RBI, Chrome Enterprise Browser, and AppOmni for SSPM.

Cisco

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is a comprehensive cloud-based security solution that provides advanced threat protection, data loss prevention, and web filtering capabilities. It offers real-time visibility and control over web traffic, enabling organizations to enforce policies and protect against web-based threats. The solution uses machine learning and behavioral analysis to detect and block advanced threats, including malware, phishing, and ransomware. It also provides granular control over web access, allowing organizations to block or allow specific websites and applications based on user, group, or location. With Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway, organizations can ensure compliance with industry regulations and protect sensitive data from unauthorized access or exfiltration. The solution is easy to deploy and manage, with a user-friendly interface and centralized policy management.

Netskope

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.

1. IBM 2. Microsoft 3. Amazon 4. Google 5. Apple 6. Cisco Systems 7. Oracle 8. Intel 9. HP Inc. 10. Dell Technologies 11. Verizon Communications 12. AT&T 13. Comcast 14. T-Mobile 15. Sprint 16. Vodafone 17. Orange 18. BT Group 19. Deutsche Telekom 20. Telefonica 21. Nokia 22. Ericsson 23. Samsung Electronics 24. Sony 25. Panasonic 26. LG Electronics 27. Siemens 28. General Electric 29. Ford Motor Company 30. General Motors 31. Toyota Motor Corporation 32. Volkswagen Group

Arrow, Cloudrise, Sainsbury, Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy, CSA, AVX Corporation Nuna, City of San Diego Case, Genomic Health Case Study, Oak Hill Advisors, MaRS Discovery District.

Cisco Secure Access vs. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway