We performed a comparison between Cloudflare Access and Netskope Private Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ZTNA as a Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Enables me to work from two locations."
"It's the endpoint exposition. We don't need to expose our VPN server to the internet and need a zero-test solution. I can apply some conditional access to the endpoint that's connecting to our network to check their security policies or the security condition of their workstation. Once the workstation is trying to connect to my internal network, then I would like to check the discrete condition of these endpoints that are trying to access my internal network. We created some conditional access. We have CrowdStrike, to check if the CrowdStrike is installed, to check if it's updated, and to check for Windows updates. We created some conditional policies to check it."
"For Cloudflare Access, I am using the free plan...The most valuable feature is their protection."
"Cloudflare, in my opinion, was easy to implement."
"The tool also offers good scalability, and the dashboard, along with real-time analytics, is very good."
"It is a stable solution."
"The product's scalability is good."
"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."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"In the VPN scenario, what was happening, the user would get back to the complete source. But in NPA, the application will go to the user. There is an outbound connection. There is no inbound. Storage providers are also not there. It's the best feature because it is the replacement of the VPN."
"The initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."
"When there are any dynamic changes in complex applications, the tool takes a lot of time, making its analytics-related area a major matter of concern where improvements are needed."
"For the topic of improvement, providing some training material is one of my suggestions."
"The pricing is an area that can be improved. Pricing, as far as I recall, was the source of our problems."
"They don't have a person to provide support for customers using the solution under their free plan."
"I would like to see them go down the path of including SD-WAN. Currently, they don't do SD-WAN. If they could somehow natively do that inside of the platform, that would be amazing. I don't know if they're going to do it, but it would be amazing if they do."
"The product is not easy to use."
"The major problem that we are facing is if we deploy Netskope on the server level or if we get a new server in the EMEA factor, it will affect all the machines. Recently, this has caused us to fail some reviews."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."
"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."
"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."
"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."
Cloudflare Access is ranked 9th in ZTNA as a Service with 5 reviews while Netskope Private Access is ranked 6th in ZTNA as a Service with 14 reviews. Cloudflare Access is rated 8.8, while Netskope Private Access is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cloudflare Access writes "Replaces traditional VPN and enables endpoint exposition ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netskope Private Access writes "Provides network visibility, infrastructure protection and advanced security protections, especially the DLP (Data Loss Protection)". Cloudflare Access is most compared with Twingate, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Auth0 and Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy, whereas Netskope Private Access is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Appgate SDP, Google BeyondCorp Remote Access and Cisco Secure Client. See our Cloudflare Access vs. Netskope Private Access report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.
