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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform vs Veritas Alta SaaS Protection comparison

 

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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (6th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (4th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
27th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
SaaS Backup (18th), SaaS Management Platforms (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.7%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is 1.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.7%
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection1.6%
Other95.7%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
SG
Technical Manager at Rigor Systems Limited
Experience with offsite backup enhances data integrity and reduces on-premise reliance
One of the features of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection that customers are looking for is immutability. This is the most important feature. With the cloud, Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is actually in the cloud, which means they have unlimited space to do their backups. They can expand on a need-to-need basis. The automated recovery feature of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection makes the recovery much easier, as opposed to earlier methods where we were using scripts to do the restore. Currently, it's automated so you just do a click. You select the feature in a graphical interface, making it easy to use even for a newbie.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's ability to block access to unauthorized applications has been excellent."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped our company save on operational costs and expenses significantly."
"Overall, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a ten out of ten."
"The application whitelisting feature allows us to block and manage approved applications effectively. It ensures that no one can install an application on our systems unless it is approved by me, which is very efficient."
"Zero-Touch is the future, and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is the easiest way to accomplish that."
"The most valuable feature is selective elevation, which allows elevating an individual process to admin privilege without granting admin privilege to that user, which has been by far the most useful feature outside of the overall solution itself."
"Overall, everything is excellent, and everything is well-prepared, from the laptops provided to the overall setup."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"The duplication is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The solution is stable; I haven't experienced any bugs or glitches on it."
"The automated recovery feature of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection makes the recovery much easier, as opposed to earlier methods where we were using scripts to do the restore."
"It's a good solution. It's pretty stable."
"What I like most about Veritas SaaS Backup is that it is easy to work on."
"The most valuable features are the ease of administration and the ease of configuration."
"It excels in performance and delivery but they are quiet on the market."
"We're comfortable using this kind of technology. It's user-friendly."
 

Cons

"ThreatLocker Allowlisting needs to improve its user interface and overall workflow."
"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."
"A valuable addition to ThreatLocker would be a column in the audit page displaying a VirusTotal score for each file."
"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."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
"Adding applications to the allowlist can sometimes feel overwhelming."
"Their product is solid. I have a hard time complaining much about it because when we do find little things, they are usually interface-related or related to things that would be nice to have."
"Training has been our biggest hurdle, and getting people on board or having active integration with modules that maybe we don't have access to would help."
"When you finish a project, the client should have the opportunity to browse the files rather than simply ending the contract. Also, it's not possible to recover earlier versions. It should be possible to have a database for recovering files after you finish a contract. There's no solution for this from Veritas."
"When you finish a project, the client should have the opportunity to browse the files rather than simply ending the contract."
"The go-between is a Veritas partner, so the customer support was not that good. The solution is fine except when there is a purchasing crisis where you have to remake the ecosystem. It causes a lot of issues. The support was a problem, but we're okay with it as long as we have someone to communicate with."
"The implementation could be improved. The server setup is very easy, but some specific client implementation, for example, Oracle or SQL servers, are a little bit complicated."
"The tool can be improved in terms of maintainability and flexibility, especially as companies grow larger. In these aspects, I feel Veeam is better for cloud and operational purposes."
"The backup reports and the dashboard need improvement."
"An area for improvement is the product's performance, especially how long it takes to do a job."
"The go-between is a Veritas partner, so the customer support was not that good."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."
"The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"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."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
"SaaS Backup isn't the most expensive solution."
"The program is quite expensive."
"I would rate this solution's pricing as five out of five."
"This solution is not cheap and not expensive but priced in the mid-range."
"The tool is expensive compared to Veeam."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
892,678 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Healthcare Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business52
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

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 good because it has a nominal price.I would say ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Pr...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by providing admin rights that allow us to manage it from the server by providing some token IDs or any kind of OTP if someone h...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is to secure the server.A specific example of how I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to secure my s...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veritas Alto SaaS Protection?
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is slightly expensive, but they can do more on it. The exact figure for Veritas Alta SaaS Protection depends on the size of data being stored, the region, and the type ...
What needs improvement with Veritas Alto SaaS Protection?
For Veritas Alta SaaS Protection, the only challenge is downtime and the impact of time synchronization whereby different customers are on different time zones, and Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is ...
What is your primary use case for Veritas Alto SaaS Protection?
For the customers that I'm dealing with, they are using Veritas Alta SaaS Protection for long-term retention and offline backups. This means they don't have to constrain their on-premise resources....
 

Also Known As

Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
SaaS Backup
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform vs. Veritas Alta SaaS Protection and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
892,678 professionals have used our research since 2012.