Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Broadcom and ThreatLocker are both solutions in the ZTNA as a Service category. Broadcom is ranked #22, while ThreatLocker is ranked #5 with an average rating of 9.2. Broadcom holds a 2.1% mindshare in ZaaS, compared to ThreatLocker’s 1.4% mindshare. Additionally, 99% of ThreatLocker users are willing to recommend the solution.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 2026

Symantec Zero Trust Network Access and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform are competing cybersecurity products focusing on zero-trust principles. Symantec appears to have the upper hand in pricing and customer support, while ThreatLocker stands out for its advanced features.

Features: Symantec emphasizes seamless integration, strong remote access capabilities, and layered security to prevent unauthorized access. ThreatLocker focuses on granular endpoint control, application security with dynamic policies, and in-depth visibility into applications. Symantec highlights strong remote access, whereas ThreatLocker offers granular security controls for greater configurability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Symantec offers a straightforward deployment process with excellent integration into existing systems paired with responsive customer service. ThreatLocker requires a more detailed deployment due to complex policy configurations but provides comprehensive documentation and support resources. Symantec stands out for easy integration, while ThreatLocker offers detailed support tools.

Pricing and ROI: Symantec features competitive pricing models, promising quick returns on investment due to easy installation and compatibility. ThreatLocker’s cost is higher, justified by extensive features and powerful security measures. Though more expensive initially, ThreatLocker offers long-term ROI by reducing security risks and providing greater control, making it appealing for those prioritizing extensive security features.

To learn more, read our detailed ZTNA as a Service Report (Updated: October 2026).

Buyer's Guide

ZTNA as a Service

October 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,929 peers since 2012

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

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.4%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform	1.4%
iboss	3.4%
Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)	2.1%
Other	93.1%

ZTNA as a Service

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.

Read full review

cto543714

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.

Read full review

Santo Joy

Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees

Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies

The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I recommend iboss for organizations looking for strong cloud-based web security and centralized access control."

"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

"The iboss solution gives me the ability to scan the traffic through all the ports, through all the 131,000 PCP and UDP ports, and with this ability, we have the granularity also for consults over social media and applications on mobile, and this is an advantage that the customers are looking for right now."

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

"The single-pane-of-glass console is one of the useful features of iboss because it provides a centralized view of security activities, web traffic, user access, and potential threats."

"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."

"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."

More iboss pros

"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."

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is a very nice platform, and we are very satisfied as customers with how it is helping us."

"The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform offers is that the entire platform is perfect, it is very user-friendly and helps us manage our endpoints easily, and the parts that stand out for my team are elevation, password rotation, and application control."

"ThreatLocker's VDI environment, coupled with the ringfencing capabilities of policies, gives us confidence."

"Overall, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a ten out of ten."

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has absolutely helped my company save on operational costs and expenses."

"We are seeing a return on investment, especially with our managers and customers."

"The deployment is very easy."

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted my organization, and the blocking capabilities have been very beneficial."

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform pros

Cons

"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."

"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."

"Its pricing could be better."

"The easiest device I have set up was the Barracuda line of products."

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."

"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."

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."

"I appreciate that iboss's single pane of glass console gives centralized visibility into web traffic, user activity, security policies, and alerts from one dashboard, allowing us to quickly investigate incidents and monitor policy violations without switching between multiple tools, improving operational efficiency; however, the dashboard customization and reporting could be more flexible."

More iboss cons

"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."

"I have several clients in the last few months that have definitely caused a problem where a domain controller completely destroyed replication once Network Control was put in place, and now our AVD servers in Azure also lose domain trust occasionally and it is intermittent, making it rather hard to prove to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that they really need to look at when there is a VPN in the middle of a domain controller."

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has reduced some of the operational costs in my company in terms of time spent on tickets, but nothing major."

"My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is expensive, but it is what you would expect because it is a comprehensive platform."

"In my opinion, it is a love-hate relationship with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform; everybody hates it because it causes so much need for user input to request to allow applications, but it is a necessary evil because security is paramount and it is the most important feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform."

"From my perspective, the initial setup and policy configuration of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform could be more intuitive, especially for new users."

"The allowlisting feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is really good. It's very, very strict, so in some ways, it can be frustrating because you have to explicitly allow each individual thing."

"My impression of the solution's allow listing feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it's a little finicky when dealing with software that is proprietary and is updated regularly."

"I assess the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites as fair. There are a few false positives."

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"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."

"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."

"So far, it has been great. I have no complaints. Of course, everybody wishes it was cheaper."

"The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long."

"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."

"Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does."

"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."

"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."

"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

14%

Outsourcing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	15

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	73
Midsize Enterprise	21
Large Enterprise	23

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

iboss could be improved by making the dashboard more user-friendly, providing more detailed real-time alerts, and imp...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

iboss is primarily used for cloud security, helping to protect users when they access websites and cloud applications...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

The pricing and licensing for iboss were reasonable for the security features. The setup costs were manageable, thoug...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it is owned by my...

See all answers

What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?

I believe ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's marketing strategy has to be changed because only fewer organizations, s...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it helps to prevent somebody from accessing scripts. It...

See all answers

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 5% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Portnox vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)

Compared 14% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)

Compared 11% of the time

Cloudflare One vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)

Compared 10% of the time

Okta Platform vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)

Compared 8% of the time

Netskope Private Access vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)

Compared 3% of the time

More Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) Competitors

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

Intercept X Endpoint vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

Airlock Digital Application Control vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

October 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Access Management

October 2026

Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) report

Download Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) product report

Buyer's Guide

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

October 2026

Download ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

Symantec Secure Access Cloud, Luminate.io, Luminate

Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing

Overview

iboss is the Zero Trust SASE platform that gives organizations complete visibility and governance over their AI, data, and applications through one unified platform, one console, one policy engine, and one data lake.

Your endpoints may already stop malware. Your data and application activity can still be invisible. iboss decrypts and understands every connection, then turns that signal into answers security leaders can act on.

The platform leads with three capabilities in this order: AI Security and Visibility, Data Security and Visibility, and App Visibility and Control. Zero Trust Network Access, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN sit underneath as the access fabric that carries those three. Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

- AI Security and Visibility: conversation capture, shadow-AI discovery, AI DLP, and agent governance across Claude, Co-Work, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok, and emerging services.

- Data Security and Visibility: full SSL/TLS decryption, deep content inspection, MIP label compliance, and one-click compliance reporting.

- App Visibility and Control: signatureless CASB, dual risk scoring, in-app controls, and SSPM for major SaaS.

- Containerized Zero Trust SASE: dedicated containers, isolated SSL keys, one console, one policy engine, one data lake.

- Access fabric: ZTNA, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN under the same platform.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

- Complete visibility over AI, data, and applications from one platform instead of separate point tools.

- Encrypted traffic is inspected by default so data decisions use content and context together.

- Shadow SaaS and new web tools appear as they are used, with enforceable controls in one console.

- Native data sovereignty through dedicated containers, in-region inspection, and per-customer SSL key custody.

- Scale proven in published materials: 10M+ users, 100+ countries, 150B+ transactions, 2.5B+ threats blocked.

Economic buyers are CISOs, CIOs, and VPs of Security. Champions include security architects, network and infrastructure leaders, SecOps, and GRC. Primary segments: enterprise and business, financial services, government (including FedRAMP Gov Cloud), healthcare, manufacturing, legal and professional services, retail and hospitality, and MSP/MSSP partners. Education, including K-12, is one vertical among these.

iboss

Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) enhances security by restricting network access based on identity verification and continuous assessment. It ensures that users connect to applications or resources only when authenticated and authorized, offering continuous protection against threats.

This robust approach caters to dynamic modern environments, providing granular access controls that adapt to real-time security conditions. By leveraging contextual analysis and policy enforcement, it ensures secure, seamless access tailored to user roles. It's fine-tuned to combat sophisticated cyber threats and limits exposure by connecting users directly to the applications they need, bypassing traditional network-based threats.

What are the critical features of Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?

Adaptive Access Control: Dynamically adjusts access based on user and device trust levels.
Granular Policy Application: Enables fine-tuned access policies for different users and devices.
Identity-Centric Security: Verifies identities before granting access to resources.
Continuous Monitoring: Keeps an eye on user activities to minimize risks.

What benefits and ROI should users look for when evaluating Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?

Enhanced Security: Reduces risk by limiting access and constantly verifying trust.
Improved Compliance: Assists in maintaining regulatory requirements with detailed access control.
Scalability: Easily expands to support growing access needs without compromising security.
Cost Efficiency: Potentially lowers costs by streamlining security operations and reducing breach incidents.

Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) is especially beneficial for industries like finance and healthcare, where secure data access is crucial. In finance, it provides secure remote banking services, while in healthcare, it ensures protected access to sensitive patient data, maintaining privacy and compliance.

Broadcom

Gain proactive, industry leading Zero Trust cybersecurity capabilities with ThreatLocker. By employing a deny-by-default approach, you will greatly enhance your security and operational efficiency. Solutions from ThreatLocker are focused on precise application control and
streamlined access management without administrative rights.

ThreatLocker Application Control solutions include Zero Trust Alllowlisting, Zero Trust Ringfencing and Privilege Access Management, significantly reducing any unauthorized software activities in your environment. Granular controls improve your overall security, while ringfencing enhances application behavior monitoring. Elevation requests will allow users to gain administrative access without IT intervention. The platform's ease of policy management and real-time threat visibility contribute to reduced help desk tickets and operational costs, ensuring protection against ransomware and
unauthorized applications.

What are the key features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform?

Zero Trust Allowlisting: Allows detailed allowlisting for specific application use.
Privilege Access Management: Streamlines administrative access requests without IT involvement.
Ringfencing: Monitors application behavior to prevent unauthorized actions.
USB access and Data storage Control: Ensures comprehensive endpoint security across networks.

What benefits and ROI should users expect?

Enhanced Security: Reduces your daily risks through deny-by-default policies and ransomware protection.
Operational Efficiency: Your overall number of help desk tickets and operational costs will be cut down.
Compliance Assurance: You maintain compliance by preventing unauthorized software actions.

Organizations often deploy ThreatLocker to ensure endpoint security in industries requiring stringent application control and administrative access management. Its functionalities are critical for managing Shadow IT, creating policies, and overseeing software installation approvals. Common usage spans sectors demanding robust security and compliance, such as finance and healthcare, where maintaining high
security and efficiency is crucial.

ThreatLocker

Sample Customers

Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

NEX, AIG, Fiverr, Upwork

Information Not Available

Find out what your peers are saying about Zscaler, Cisco, Okta and others in ZTNA as a Service. Updated: October 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors and best ZTNA 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.