We performed a comparison between Netskope Private Access and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks, Cisco and others in ZTNA as a Service."We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"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."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"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 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."
"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"The product's scalability is good."
"The product's most valuable features are cloud-based services and secure internet access. We don't have to set up any physical appliances."
"I find all Zscaler Private Access features valuable because each replaces flawed technologies, such as EPAs being replacements for VPN and PR as a replacement for PAM, so I can't mention only one valuable feature. Overall, Zscaler Private Access is a good solution."
"The best feature is the ability to establish the connection between your public network and automatically connect to the intranet connection."
"Yes, it is very stable. I have never seen it go down, not once."
"The most valuable feature is the manageability of the micro tunnels."
"It is straightforward to set up."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to establish connectivity for remote users and remote endpoints. It offers a high level of granularity compared to typical VPNs, which also encapsulate a lot of I/O."
"The most valuable features are the File Type Control and SSL bypass policies. We"
"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 ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."
"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."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"Netskope detects certain data or contents, but there are some limitations on how we can customize those policies for DLP."
"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 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."
"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."
"We often face performance and latency issues with Zscaler SASE."
"There is some issue while accessing the portal. It takes too long."
"More on-prem infrastructure is required when Zscaler Private Access is to be implemented as a single point of entry."
"What could be improved in Zscaler Private Access is its notification. For example, if there's a speed issue, there should be a pop-up that alerts the user about it. If there is a network quality issue, for example, it isn't good enough to connect to, or the network quality is bad, there should be a notification from the solution. Zscaler Private Access also needs improvement in terms of its interface and security."
"The stability could be improved."
"Conflicts arise if you do not have the same management teams on the product."
"To enhance their offering, it is advisable for them to focus on strengthening the foundation of their architecture. Additionally, they should consider integrating a broader range of services that go beyond what managed service providers typically offer independently."
"Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its collaboration with applications without compromising security."
Netskope Private Access is ranked 6th in ZTNA as a Service with 14 reviews while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 1st in ZTNA as a Service with 34 reviews. Netskope Private Access is rated 8.6, while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Netskope Private Access writes "Provides network visibility, infrastructure protection and advanced security protections, especially the DLP (Data Loss Protection)". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". Netskope Private Access is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Appgate SDP, Google BeyondCorp Remote Access, Cloudflare Access and Cisco Secure Client, whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client and Cisco Umbrella.
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.
