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)
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
SaaS Backup (19th), SaaS Management Platforms (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.7%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is 1.7%, up from 0.3% 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 Protection1.7%
Other95.6%
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 stands out because they understand application whitelisting and elevation controls deeply, addressing real issues effectively."
"The customer service is excellent, ten out of ten."
"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."
"Overall, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has significantly strengthened our endpoint security by enforcing zero trust principles while maintaining operational flexibility and user productivity."
"ThreatLocker's most valuable feature is its scanning capability, which executes all types of executable files."
"The customer service is amazing."
"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."
"We found that we did not need to pay for two of the same products when we could have an all-in-one solution using ThreatLocker."
"The solution's hardware appliance is very scalable and very useful."
"I would recommend this solution because it covers the total scope of Office 365."
"We're comfortable using this kind of technology. It's user-friendly."
"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."
"Some of the tool's best features include an enhanced dashboard and strong security features compared to native Veritas. Our environment is entirely automated."
"It excels in performance and delivery but they are quiet on the market."
"he most valuable feature is that it's not so intrusive with computer resources."
 

Cons

"If I have to say what they can improve, one area would be making policy tuning and onboarding simpler for large enterprise environments."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform should focus more on the application allow listing feature, which shows whether a program has been recognized but not necessarily whether it has been trusted."
"The Cyber Hero certification exam could use a bit of love, but overall, I have been very satisfied with the platform."
"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."
"Initially, the learning curve was slightly high for me, however, that has been resolved now."
"ThreatLocker would benefit from incorporating an antivirus feature or comprehensive 24-hour log monitoring, a valuable enhancement for both business and enterprise-level users."
"It would be beneficial to have a tighter integration into PSA systems so that approvals can be done directly without having to leave the PSA."
"When it comes to how the solution can be improved, I think app stores, like the web extension in the app stores within the Windows platform, would help rather than rolling it out manually."
"Currently, it isn't possible to use anything other than Veritas cloud to back up to. I think today it's important to cover the three major cloud provider: GCP, Azure and AWS."
"They should review the cost aspect of the subscription for Veritas Alta SaaS Protection because customers are going for the cheaper storage, which doesn't give those features in terms of dedup ratios."
"Licensing has been a struggle."
"In the future, we would like to see support for virtualized machines."
"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. they should offer a bit more assistance with the setup for these particular items."
"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."
"Other people will prefer this solution because they're used to it. However, from my point of view, you have more breaks, more failures on it than you will with Commvault."
"The solution does lack a lot of features, and we're considering switching."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."
"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."
"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."
"I do not know about the licensing and price as it comes bundled from our MSP. However, it seems fairly reasonable for us, which is why we chose it."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long."
"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"The tool is expensive compared to Veeam."
"I would rate this solution's pricing as five out of five."
"SaaS Backup isn't the most expensive solution."
"The program is quite expensive."
"This solution is not cheap and not expensive but priced in the mid-range."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
908,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business56
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise12
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 is that it is straightforward, and there are no issues.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Improvements for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform could include some additional guidance in the beginning of setup. We were fortunate enough to work with an engineer for a lot of our setup and it w...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is endpoint protection, a zero trust platform for applications, We use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for application whitelisting and blackl...
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: June 2026.
908,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.