Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

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
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
5th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
8th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
4th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
1st
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
2nd
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.1%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 15.3%, down from 18.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks15.3%
iboss2.1%
Other82.6%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. 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. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Roberto Pastorino - PeerSpot reviewer
Have supported client adoption of security solutions but need more control over infrastructure
It's a working solution. It's not the easiest, but no DLP solution is easy. With Netskope, the whole infrastructure is proprietary. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is using a service in AWS, and it's not totally a proprietary infrastructure. Sometimes a third-party outage could impact the whole operability. I'm not certain if the vendor is moving towards sovereignty of infrastructure at this moment, but from what I saw in the past, there was this reliance on third parties for the infrastructure: AWS, GCP, Oracle, and others. This is one point of attention for me. I would prefer more proprietary infrastructure.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"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."
"The performance is good."
"The solution also provides traffic analysis, threat prevention, URL filtering, and segmentation. That combination is important because it enhances the protection and makes the traffic more secure. It also keeps things more up-to-date, enabling us to deal with more of the current threats."
"Prisma helped us build a moat around our production systems. It's now impossible to log into our production from a non-MDM laptop. Prisma Access provides decent security overall."
"Palo Alto Firewall is one of the best firewalls in the world."
"It's quite reliable and performs well for users."
"The solution improved the consistency of our security controls and the BCP. There has been a 20 percent reduction in TCO. Prisma Access also enabled us to deliver better applications by centralizing security management."
"Prisma integrates well with Cortex XDR and Cortex Data Lake. My company has been also using Prisma Access in-house for nearly a year, and it integrates seamlessly."
"Prisma Access protects all app traffic, so that users can gain access to all apps and that's very important because we need to be able to access everything. It also allows us to access non-web apps; anything internal that we need access to, we can access."
 

Cons

"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"The documentation is generally good, but they could provide a more detailed description of all the configuration steps. I have to search for information or call support. Palo Alto could add more knowledge base articles about configuration with screenshots and walkthroughs. That would be helpful. When configuring a product, you want to see examples of how it is done."
"Its security is good. Everything is good, but the way the dashboard responds can be improved. It takes time to implement a policy. If you change only two or three lines and push the policy to make the change work, it takes 20 to 30 minutes even for a small change. That is something very irritating from the implementation perspective."
"While Palo Alto has understood the essence of building capabilities around cloud technology and have come up with a CASB offering, that is a very new product. There are other companies that have better offerings for understanding cloud applications and have more graceful controls. That's something that Palo Alto needs to work on."
"Sometimes a third-party outage could impact the whole operability."
"The cloud setup is straightforward, and the onboarding process is much better, but the on-premises initial setup is slightly complex."
"There can be some latency issues with the solution that should be improved."
"The solution needs to be more compatible with other solutions. This is specifically a problem for us when it comes to healthcare applications. They have proprietary connection types and things of that nature that make compatibility a challenge sometimes."
"It would be nice to manage Prisma Access through the cloud instead of through Panorama. You can use the cloud version to monitor Prisma Access, but it doesn't have all the features yet, and it's not 100% done."
 

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."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"We have to pay additional costs for maintenance and support services."
"The licensing model for this product is complicated and changes all the time, making it very hard for the user to comprehend the configuration."
"There's no reason not to buy the enterprise version that gives you unlimited PoPs, but you must understand the limitations you impose on yourself if you do that. If you go crazy, that allowlist will be too big for Kubernetes clusters."
"It is not cheap. It is expensive. The good thing is that you are able to pay for what you need, but overall, it is not cheap. The pricing is not based on packages. You pay based on the features. If you want DLP, you only pay for DLP. They are very flexible. It is not cheap, but the licensing is flexible. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"I'm still comparing, but the solution is quite expensive."
"It is a little expensive. Because it is one of the best in the market, it is a little bit more expensive than other vendors."
"Prisma SaaS is more expensive than similar solutions but I think it's worth it."
"The licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis and for what we get, the price is good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise28
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil. While iboss performed well, some competitors offered simpler implementati...
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 old proxies to cloud proxies, and we did POCs with different giants at that time. ...
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 alternatives available, but they do not perform as well. Since iboss is cloud-based,...
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure access service edge (SASE) designed to deliver network security in a cloud-deliver...
What do you like most about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being user-friendly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
From my experience, Palo Alto is more expensive compared to solutions like Netskope and Triscale.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Prisma Access, GlobalProtect, Palo Alto GlobalProtect Mobile Security Manager, Prisma SaaS by Palo Alto Networks, Prisma Access
 

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.
Concord Hospital, State of Colorado, Essilor International, RheinLand Versicherungsgruppe, University of Westminster, Universidade Nove de Julho, SPAR Austria, CAME Group, ZipRealty, Greenhill & Co., IKT Agder, Aviva Stadium, Animal Logic, Management & Training Corporation, Brigham Young University Hawaii, School District of Chilliwack
Find out what your peers are saying about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs. iboss and other solutions. Updated: October 2025.
871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.