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
6.9
Number of Reviews
24
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) (6th)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (3rd), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA (6th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Twingate
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
18th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (12th), Internet Security (10th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (15th), ZTNA (10th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (19th)
 

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

"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"As I mentioned, the return on investment is significant, as it saved our office locations' bandwidth because when you are working remotely at home, your internet traffic routes directly to iboss and will not go to your office building, saving bandwidth bottlenecks and ensuring that issues with our building internet circuits will not impact your internet connectivity because you are directly going to the iboss data center."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"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."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"I really enjoy ringfencing and elevation features. It makes my life easier because I do not have to get on a computer to elevate a prompt to allow users to run something they run every day as an admin."
"Zero-Touch is the future, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is the easiest way to accomplish that."
"Customer service is good. The Cyber Hero program ensures there is always someone available to help."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform provides no-sweat security that we can easily deploy. We do not worry about our habitual clickers because we receive an alert if they try to do something, and we know ThreatLocker has already taken care of it."
"The control list is the best feature. For our company, it provides value to our customers since they can see we are improving our security."
"The great thing is that if you get a malicious email and you try to run something, ThreatLocker is not going to let it do anything. It is not going to let anything infect your network."
"My advice for others looking into using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is to reach out to them, and they will get you set up with a free trial and use the software and the dashboard."
"The customer service is amazing."
"I appreciate Twingate's developer-first approach, particularly its excellent developer tools for deployment and management."
 

Cons

"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"Its pricing could be better."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"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 endpoint-type solution is an area that needs some improvement."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"It has not helped reduce our help desk tickets. We are still in learning mode, and after we are fully knowledgeable, we will be able to see some ticket reductions."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
"Another thing is that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is not an entire DLP replacement."
"The company should strive to stay ahead of all the developments happening externally. If their progress accelerates more rapidly than the ongoing changes outside, it would prove advantageous."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by exploring ways of ensuring it is deployed deeper in the device rather than through an extension on the browser and finding ways to integrate all browsers."
"I have not seen a return on investment yet, but there is a small amount of time saved because of fewer dashboards."
"There could be options for handling a bulk amount of machines simultaneously."
"One of the things I would really like is the ability to create custom groups and assign machines to them."
"Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation."
 

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 expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"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."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"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."
"Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
"Twingate's pricing is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
914,351 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
17%
University
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business58
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise15
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
I think iboss could be improved by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible, and simplifying troubl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
I use iboss as a cloud-based secure web gateway to provide secure internet access, web filtering, and protect remote ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
My experience with iboss's pricing structure, setup cost, and licensing model has been positive, straightforward, and...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I am not sure about operational or cost expenses because we have not really experienced that.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
When it comes to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's policy making, it is very granular, but the moment you zoom out, ...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's main use case for us was data storage access control.We used ThreatLocker Zero Tru...
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, ThreatLocker and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: September 2026.
914,351 professionals have used our research since 2012.