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

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Sponsored
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (4th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (5th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (1st)
Symantec Zero Trust Network...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
22nd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Access Management (25th), ZTNA (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.6%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 11.7%, down from 15.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) is 1.3%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks11.7%
iboss2.6%
Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)1.3%
Other84.4%
ZTNA as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Roberto Pastorino - PeerSpot reviewer
Network and Cybersecurity Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
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.
cto543714 - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Restricts access to applications but improvement is needed in integrations
Over the last year, I have been working with customers because it's changing and maturing. These things are rolled out in segments and chunks, not all at once. Additional internal work is often required to make it functional, such as properly configuring the active directory. This internal work can take up to three months. The process varies, and implementing Symantec ZTNA quickly is not realistic. I wouldn't recommend the tool to non-core customers because you won't get the support you need. I'd rate Symantec ZTNA a seven on a scale of one to ten. They're still integrating different pieces into their solution. The challenge with ZTNA is that different companies implement it slightly differently, with some features present in one product but missing in another. ZTNA is a tricky acronym that companies use, but when you look closely, you find that each vendor might only have some of the expected features.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"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."
"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."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"I think the stability of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is excellent, and I would rate it ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is the zero-trust part of this solution."
"A feature I've found very helpful is run time security because most of the products on the market will look at security during the build time, and they don't really look at what happens once you're going into production."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is a seamless solution."
"The stacked policies, event policies, and routing policies are easy to understand for someone with general knowledge."
"The most valuable features are ZTNA 2.0, CASB, Threat Prevention, and Autonomous Digital Experience Management (ADAM)."
"The setup is relatively straightforward."
"The solution's most valuable features were the model's reduced complexity on the client side and its capability to provide security."
"The most valuable feature of this product is restricting and controlling what people have access to. If I want a contractor to connect to my network, I can give them access to only the specific things they need without giving them full VPN access to my entire network. That's the main benefit everyone gets from it. The value depends on how many users and applications you have and what you want to share."
 

Cons

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"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."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"It's not really Prisma's fault, but when you try to create exceptions you don't really have those abilities. You cannot say, on the management platform, "Hey, for these users I want to create these exceptions." That is one thing that I have gotten some complaints about, and we have faced some challenges there."
"Their next release should provide solutions for the mobile environment."
"I haven't seen any SD-WAN configuration capability. If Prisma Access would support SD-WAN, that would help... SD-WAN devices should be able to reach Prisma Access, and Palo Alto should support different, vendor-specific devices, not just Palo Alto devices, for SD-WAN configuration."
"If you compare Prisma SaaS against other products, such as Cloud Log, it's a little bit tricky to understand, but it offers different functionality that other products don't have. From a user usability point of view, you need some training for this product, as an admin, you need a couple of demos."
"Sometimes a third-party outage could impact the whole operability."
"We would like to see improvements in the licensing; currently, Palo Alto provides 500 to 1000 licenses for users, and we want to see 1500 to 2000 licenses for one version."
"Palo Alto Prisma 10 came out over a year ago. Palo Alto added this identity management feature. The legacy way Palo Alto selected which user is sitting on an IP address it passes through has been clunky."
"Lacks a hybrid model which has API plus in-line security."
"For areas of improvement, the main issue is with integrations. The Symantec ZTNA comprises many products cobbled together on the back end. Sometimes, the integrations work well; sometimes, they don't. For example, if you want to use two-factor authentication, you need to integrate that into the solution. Or if you want to accept protocols other than web coming to your secure gateway, that's another integration. Supporting different devices like Macs, Samsung phones, or iPhones also requires more integrations. Ensuring all these integrations work properly is an ongoing process and a moving target."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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 have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"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 probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution, especially when compared to other solutions like Cisco. There are no additional charges apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution."
"Actually the solution is very expensive. I don't know the particulars since the purchasing team dealt with it."
"The solution is expensive."
"I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing."
"The solution requires a license and the technical support has extra costs. The licensing model could improve."
"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."
"The pricing is very friendly. It's not confusing to figure out your workload and how much you'd be paying for the solution."
"It's pricey, it's not cheap. But you get what you pay for."
"Pricing varies depending on the situation. In competitive situations, it's usually priced competitively. Nobody pays the full MSRP. Typically, you negotiate and work with them on the pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
880,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

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 Business23
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise27
No data available
 

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 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 ac...
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 ...
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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
Pricing varies depending on the situation. In competitive situations, it's usually priced competitively. Nobody pays ...
What needs improvement with Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
For areas of improvement, the main issue is with integrations. The Symantec ZTNA comprises many products cobbled toge...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
The solution helps to allow access only to what is explicitly needed. This means restricting access to specific appli...
 

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
Symantec Secure Access Cloud, Luminate.io, Luminate
 

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
NEX, AIG, Fiverr, Upwork
Find out what your peers are saying about Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks, Cisco and others in ZTNA as a Service. Updated: October 2025.
880,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.