No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform vs Twingate comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 2026

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
6.9
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
5th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Twingate
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (12th), Internet Security (11th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (15th), ZTNA (10th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (18th)
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Joey Benamy - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Cyber Liability Engineer at OncoLens
Helps reduce access-related support tickets, is quick to deploy, and streamlines onboarding
We were able to add Twingate into our infrastructure without having to change our infrastructure or how people work. We reaped the benefits of Twingate immediately because it replaced an alternative solution with a lot of overhead. Twingate helped reduce access-related support tickets by 80 percent. Twingate streamlines onboarding for our company, especially for the engineering team, by automating resource access through directory integrations. New employees generally require no manual configuration within Twingate, saving us significant time and effort. The resiliency is directly proportional to the level of control we exert over its components. We can manage Twingate connectors to support high availability, ensuring the system is as reliable as needed. This flexibility and control enhance Twingate's resiliency capabilities significantly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."
"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."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform benefits our company because we can be secure while remaining relaxed, as we are only expecting normal behavior and nothing unusual."
"For companies that are considering ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my advice would be to go for it, as it truly changes how you secure your clients and offers more opportunities to provide services to clients that were not feasible before."
"Ringfencing is a valuable feature."
"ThreatLocker saves me a couple of hours per day dealing with threats and encrypting efforts elsewhere."
"The single pane of glass management for all this functionality is really the best feature, as it unifies many utilities that would have been separate costs before and lets us sleep at night knowing that things are being monitored 24 hours."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped us protect our environments and have more meaningful requests for access as well as meaningful logging for response."
"The most valuable feature is probably the ability to block programs from running. ThreatLocker has some built-in features that make it super easy. You can also contact their support within the program. If you're having issues, you can click on that button and connect with someone in five to 10 seconds."
"The biggest positive impact ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has had on my organization is improved security."
"I appreciate Twingate's developer-first approach, particularly its excellent developer tools for deployment and management."
 

Cons

"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, and that is where in 2025 we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform."
"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."
"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."
"Its pricing could be better."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"iboss can be improved because the integration could be better; you need to import all the sites that you access today, and there are a few problems whenever you import thousands of websites, making the integration process messy for the users."
"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."
"Efficiency-wise, it was a bit harder in the beginning because we were new to the product and it was a lot of overhead to manage it."
"We also have customers who are frustrated because they cannot do what they used to do, which was run anything they wanted to."
"I'm not sure if I'm using it wrong; however, I find that I have to babysit it too much."
"The only improvement I would suggest for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is the ability to stop automatic processes when pushing out updates or applying new policies to your computers."
"From one to ten, I would rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten just because the initial setup was a little confusing."
"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."
"ThreatLocker's technical support process could be streamlined by reducing the number of steps required to reach a human agent."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform could be improved by addressing the human identity piece, whether through ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform or another tool."
"Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"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."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
"Twingate's pricing is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
903,182 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Comms Service Provider
17%
University
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business53
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise11
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is goo...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has been fairly good with not a lot of complaints. If I have to s...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I currently work in the Enterprise GitLab platform for Scania where we have a lot of users using our GitLab platform ...
What needs improvement with Twingate?
Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation. While it hasn't directly affected m...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
No data available
 

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.
Information Not Available
Blend, Modern Health, Webflow, Liberis, Cerebral, Homebase, Bloomreach, Cameo, Hippo and Bitpanda
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: June 2026.
903,182 professionals have used our research since 2012.