We performed a comparison between Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy 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."It's reliable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy provides more control of our assets because normally when you're using Google Cloud, you have to use your Google email. IAP can control the assets that only come from the dedicated company or IP address."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"We do not need to learn anything new to use the product."
"If you have a good understanding of infrastructure, this solution is perfect."
"The initial setup wasn't too difficult."
"The app provides ready-made services that we can talk to without issue."
More Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy Pros →
"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."
"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 base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"The product's scalability is good."
"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."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"With private access or next-gen VPN, they are able to keep you secure, but they are invisible in terms of how they do it. Anybody working from home and trying to bring up VPN quickly can pretty much get VPN up and running in a matter of minutes because this doesn't require any VPN technology on-prem. All the VPN technologies that you're using to access applications on-premise can be eliminated by using their software. If you're accessing Microsoft 365 or salesforce.com, you can go straight out from your home office or home internet to that application rather than having to come through a VPN. It still has all the policies enforced, and it mitigates any business risks in terms of how that user is accessing that application and what they're doing inside of it. VPN piece is really critical, especially at this time of Covid, and your latency also goes down. Your latency gets better by using the platform because they're intercepting your traffic, routing it through their local data center, and then sending it to whichever SaaS service or whatever you're going to. It does it better, faster, and quicker with all your governance policies enforced, rather than you having to go through your data center. So, all the traffic gets hauls there, and then that traffic has got to route somewhere else, and then it has got to go up to the cloud. Your latency actually goes down. They can guarantee 15 milliseconds or less pretty much across anywhere on the planet for about 95% or 90% of it."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"We encounter issues while setting up emails for the solution."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The solution should have better integration."
"The solution is a bit complex and could be made easier to use."
"There is room for improvement in the tools and features available on the GCP. In particular, the managed databases and queues could be improved, and it would be beneficial to have more offerings in areas such as data science and data warehousing. Additionally, GCP could benefit from offering similar tools to those offered by its competitors, such as Amazon AWS's Redshift."
"The solution's security should be improved."
"It is an expensive solution, so I would like its price to be improved."
"The product is expensive. Its price needs improvement."
More Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy Cons →
"The ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."
"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."
"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."
"Netskope Private Access only supports TCP and UDP ports and does not support ICMP or ping."
"Netskope needs to provide some kind of data protection strategy as well because, currently, if you connect through private access, we don't have any data protection policies or implementation."
"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."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
More Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy Pricing and Cost Advice →
Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy is ranked 6th in ZTNA with 44 reviews while Netskope Private Access is ranked 7th in ZTNA as a Service with 14 reviews. Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy is rated 8.4, while Netskope Private Access is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy writes "User-friendly, easy to navigate, and intuitive interface". 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)". Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy is most compared with Cloudflare Access, Okta Workforce Identity, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform and Cisco Duo, whereas Netskope Private Access is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Appgate SDP, Cisco Secure Client and Google BeyondCorp Remote Access. See our Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy 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.
