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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform vs Twingate comparison

Why PeerSpot?
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
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA (4th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Twingate
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (17th), Internet Security (14th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (18th), ZTNA (13th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (20th)
 

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

"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"I would say iboss is a very good product; its scalability is very good, and it's seamless for the user."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"The biggest positive impact ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has had on my organization is improved security."
"Overall, I rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a 10, and I would advise other companies considering the solution that they should have done it yesterday."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is a very nice platform, and we are very satisfied as customers with how it is helping us."
"Zero-Touch is the future, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is the easiest way to accomplish that."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform benefits my company by allowing us to be preventative instead of being retroactive or reactive."
"ThreatLocker has made it easier for my team to check or block potentially risky applications before they are installed because the features are easy to navigate and very ergonomic."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The pre-built policies and the fact that I get notified when a user requests an application are significant."
"I appreciate Twingate's developer-first approach, particularly its excellent developer tools for deployment and management."
 

Cons

"I would like to see simpler dashboards, more detailed reporting, and faster performance in iboss."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"Its pricing could be better."
"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."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"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."
"I find that the learning mode is too accessible. Technicians sometimes default to it instead of manually building policy controls. I would prefer the learning mode to be harder to access, ideally hidden behind a layer that requires creating at least one policy first before using the learning mode as a supplement."
"It has not reduced helpdesk tickets. It has probably increased them by blocking applications and doing its job, resulting in people raising more tickets to know why they cannot use certain things."
"One of the things I would really like is the ability to create custom groups and assign machines to them."
"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."
"I have no complaints, but a little bit more Mac support would be great."
"Scalability is challenging, not due to the platform. Scaling ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform usage requires dedicated resources for maintenance."
"It is not easy to use. I am still learning."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation."
 

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."
"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 probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
"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."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"Twingate's pricing is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
920,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
13%
University
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise23
No data available
 

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...
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...
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...
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...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I believe ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's marketing strategy has to be changed because only fewer organizations, s...
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.
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, Portnox Security and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: October 2026.
920,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.