Netskope Reviews

Positive

My main use cases for Netskope are to provide a secure way for remote access and eliminating traditional VPN, and also to protect the web navigation for the users.

The most helpful features in Netskope are the data loss prevention module, the anti-malware module, and the integration that it has with Information Rights Management from Microsoft.

It has better categorization and more granular features regarding web protection, as it allows me to control HTTP methods. I can publish WhatsApp web for my users as read-only, for example. Other providers cannot; they are only on and off, and do not have the granularity for a website to be read-only.

That comes with a downside, which is that they need to regularly update their controls to support those features in those websites.

In terms of improvements, the possibility to export the dashboards or the data directly to Power BI would be better. The solution has its own data, but you don't get much customization that perhaps you would be able to if you were somehow able to extract the data from an API call and load it into a Power BI dashboard.

I have been working with that tool for three years.

If I were to describe Netskope support, I would say it is above average; it is very good. It's not yet excellent, however, it's very good.

It takes some time to get help as they always try to start from the beginning. There are several steps until I get a qualified, specialized technician. Most of the time, we are fairly IT savvy, so most of the issues we can resolve for ourselves, and when we open a ticket, it's something really complicated, yet we always face level one technicians that try to accomplish the same things that we already did. In those cases, we lose time until we get level two or level three support that helps us go into the situation better.

That's a tricky question regarding the pricing of Netskope. It's quite expensive. That said, if I compare that we did with other solutions, it's somehow justified.

I don't know about Netskope providing any sort of AI features at this time. We haven't gone in that way yet, and I'm not aware. Our company's decision is that we're not going there yet. 

I would rate Netskope an eight out of ten.

Neutral

My main use case for Netskope is for SWG and reverse proxy.

We have used Netskope for forward proxy to protect from different malicious websites, malicious links, and malicious files so that we can secure our environment.

Netskope has positively impacted our organization by securing all our systems, and the response time is also less, with a high catch rate for any incident.

The best features that Netskope offers in my experience include SSC for secure services, CASB which helps to protect from different attacks, SWG feature, cloud firewall, SDPN which helps to create an instant connection, and remote browser isolation which isolates uncategorized and risky websites.

Compared to Checkpoint as SaaS, the catch rate of Netskope was very high and the system consumption rate such as RAM, ROM, and memory consumption for Netskope was less compared to Checkpoint SaaS. Netskope has positively impacted our organization by securing all our systems, and the response time is also less, with a high catch rate for any incident.

Netskope's pricing is very high compared to other vendors, and compared to Zscaler, Netskope has less capability.

In my last company, I have used Netskope for around one year.

We encountered some challenges during the configuration process, but the Netskope support team helped us cope with all the challenges.

Netskope is stable, but sometimes it can cause some errors.

Netskope is scalable.

The customer support experience was moderate. When asking critical questions, we did not receive responses on time, but for general queries, we received timely responses.

I would rate the customer support a six on a scale of one to ten.

Neutral

I did not use a different solution before Netskope.

The initial setup with Netskope was straightforward.

I have seen a return on investment with Netskope as we saved a lot of time by catching all the threats and thoroughly understanding the cases.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Netskope.

There was an incident where a user was attempting to access a malicious website. The user's attempt caused a download of malicious software in the system, but because of Netskope, we were able to track all the logs and block that particular malware at the network level.

I cannot give an exact rate for how quickly Netskope detects and blocks threats because that rate changes every day.

Netskope is deployed in our organization as a hybrid cloud. We are using AWS as part of our hybrid cloud setup. We purchased Netskope through channels and other vendors, not through the AWS Marketplace.

The deployment of Netskope in our environment was medium scale. Billing depends on how you are using Netskope, and according to my experience, it should be discussed with sales people. Questions regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing should be directed to higher management as I do not have visibility into these aspects.

If your company has a quite complex or normal setup, you can use Netskope as it is the best solution for catch rate and return on investment.

I rate Netskope eight out of ten because some complex issues are not diagnosed properly and responded to correctly by their support team, plus there are sometimes issues in the product.

I use Netskope for cloud-based security within our organization's multi-cloud environments. It helps with ease of deployment and configuration, enabling us to manage security policies and integrate them with other solutions like identity providers.

Netskope has allowed us to effectively configure security policies and manage them across our environment while providing a secure and efficient solution.

Netskope is highly effective for Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with its inbuilt DLP capabilities. It protects data in the cloud, on the web, and in emails. The threat protection capabilities are beneficial, especially in reducing the load on email traffic by preventing phishing emails and providing malware protection from advanced threats. The easy deployment and configuration of the security policies make it a valuable solution.

A bit of latency is observed in some of the applications. In future updates, I would like to see improvements in latency, as well as enhancements in advanced threat protections. Specifically, the use of AI/ML for anomaly detection and dealing with signatureless advanced threats would be beneficial.

I have been using Netskope for almost a year.

I would rate the stability of Netskope around eight out of ten.

Netskope is highly scalable and has supported our organization's growth without any challenges.

I haven't encountered any major challenges with Netskope's technical support.

I previously worked with Zscaler, but I switched to Netskope due to an organizational change.

The initial setup was smooth and easy. The installation and configuration were seamless, making it straightforward to deploy.

The implementation was a distributed deployment with teams from different regions taking part. So, I can't provide an exact number of people involved.

In terms of cost savings, the solution is effective and comes at a lower cost compared to competitors like Zscaler.

Netskope is cost-effective compared to similar solutions like Zscaler.

I have evaluated both Zscaler and Netskope, and found that both are leading solutions.

I would rate the overall solution eight out of ten. Netskope is easy to deploy, with effective proxy solutions. It plays a critical role in cloud security, especially regarding the SASE framework and zero trust principles.

Most of our customers use Netskope for application navigation and the protection of the public cloud, such as Office 365. We primarily work with it as a substitution for URL filtering, but the SASE solution provides more than just URL filtering.

Netskope provides real-time protection as all traffic is analyzed in line. With the client on the device communicating with the Netskope cloud, it allows for immediate protection. 

Netskope is cloud-native, enabling differentiation of tenants in cloud applications, whether they are enterprise or personal, and provides control over shadow IT access. 

It also has a behavior engine with robust rules and machine learning capabilities, including image analysis with OCR capabilities.

There is currently no DLP on-premises. If it's needed, it could be considered a missing feature. The integration with the network part, specifically the SD-WAN, is in development and might be available soon. They lack a cloud security posture management solution.

I have been working with Netskope for several years.

I find the solution stable.

Their infrastructure supports scalability well, and they declare an SLA regarding delays, making it a solid solution.

Customer support is very good.

Positive

The initial setup is quite straightforward and well-measured. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the setup ease as eight.

The cost is comparable to other vendors, and it depends on the customer's needs.

Netskope started with a cloud-first approach, which makes it adaptable to the day-to-day changes that the cloud will generate.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use the tool to control the use of our email going outside.  We use it to secure our data. We use it for data exfiltration, enforce policies for users who use both personal and corporate accounts, and ensure PCI compliance. We also use it to block malware by detecting and blocking any malware in cloud services immediately. Additionally, we monitor privileged accounts to prevent unauthorized access to our resources. We use it to protect our privileged accounts in Microsoft Azure.

The solution provides information about third-party applications registered to our corporate email address and alerts us when users enroll in other applications using their work email.

The tool helps us detect threats and provides insights. Then, we take necessary measures to ensure users have MFA enrolled and take other security steps.

We are an airline, so our users frequently move between locations. For example, a pilot might log in from one country in the morning and another within a few hours. Netskope helps us guard against threats by detecting if a data exfiltration attempt occurs from a specific location.

I have been using the product for three years. 

We didn't have any issues with Netskope's stability. 

The scalability has been good for us because we didn't have to pay for anything extra. We locked in the price for three years at a significantly reasonable rate. I can't provide more details because the person who handled it left the team, but I believe the decision was based on cost. Given the pandemic period, when many airlines faced financial difficulties due to closed borders, it had to be a very reasonable cost or a suitable payment plan. My company has 1500 users.

I have never used technical support yet. 

We use Microsoft Azure, specifically Microsoft's CASB solution, because most companies, including ours, already use Microsoft products like Microsoft 365. Since it's already part of our subscription, it made sense to evaluate it. If we're satisfied with Microsoft by next year, we might move to it since we already have a subscription.

I rate the tool's deployment ease a nine out of ten. It's a SaaS solution; the deployment process is straightforward, ensuring it's connected internally. For what I use it for daily, it's very accessible and user-friendly, with nothing complex involved.

I wasn't involved in the initial discussions about its cost. However, within the next year, by around June, I'll need to review the vendors' quotes. Typically, our procurement team handles the process by issuing an RFP to vendors to get quotes. From there, we evaluate based on pricing and may conduct a proof of concept to assess value.

My company is mid-size. In our country, having around 2500 employees places us in the midsize category. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. The tool helps monitor Microsoft Azure activities, such as operational functions and user registrations. It checks if these actions align with normal practices to ensure security. This provides insights into applications integrated into our Azure environment

The solution is useful for remote workflow access.

Netskope’s CASB provides good visibility of the applications being used. We can use Shadow IT based on the traffic. DLP and CASB are valuable features. The tool provides extensive DLP features. We can create any level of policies and protect our data on-premise or cloud. The tool integrates with all the components very well.

The threat protection features must be improved. Other competitors on the market, like McAfee and Fortinet, provide threat protection features across all the modules.

I have been using the solution for two and a half years.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The tool’s scalability is good. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. The product is suitable for small and medium-sized businesses.

The support is good, but not up to the mark.

Neutral

The product is very easy to deploy. We have to install an agent on the machines through the distribution systems. It is the only dependency. Apart from that, we don't have any internal components on-premises at the user end. Everything is cloud-driven. I rate the ease of setup a ten out of ten. Netskope has its own cloud. We deploy the tool on-premises and on AWS. The product can be deployed for a user within a few minutes. It will take longer to deploy the tool for the whole organization.

The solution provides a very good return on investment. I rate the ROI a ten out of ten.

The pricing is very flexible. I rate the pricing a three out of ten.

Netskope is better than Zscaler.

We are users and partners of the solution. I will recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

Our one use case involved shadow IT. We had numerous cloud applications being used by the business without the IT team's awareness. A lot of data was being exchanged with these cloud applications. 

Another use case centered around our corporate applications, specifically Google Workspace. We integrated Google Workspace with Netskope to protect our cloud usage and data, including email IDs and Google Drive storage.

These are the use cases we applied the tools to.

The benefits revolved around effectively addressing the use cases using Netskope. Regardless of user location, as long as they were connected to the internet, their data remained protected at all times. These were the major benefits we obtained.

The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations.

In my previous organization, we heavily used Netskope. We employed Netskope for all our cloud applications and for managing shadow IT. So, for any applications we had in the cloud, we used Netskope to retrieve details about shadow IT. On top of it, we employed it to safeguard the data on those cloud applications.

I used Netskope five months ago. I changed organizations around five months ago. But prior to that, I was using Netskope. I have used it for approximately four years. I worked with the latest version.

It is a stable solution. From a solution perspective, I didn't face any challenges. However, there were operational matters that we managed on a day-to-day basis.

It is a scalable solution.

Approximately around 30,000 end users are using this solution.

We've encountered numerous cases. Whenever we came across functional or technical issues, we raised questions with the technical support team.

I would describe customer service and support as decent. Our technical account manager always got involved when we raised concerns, ensuring proper escalation so we got a timely resolution.

The first setup process was pretty simple. You just have to integrate the solution with cloud workspaces and applications and it is easily accomplished.

The deployment was a collaborative effort. We engaged both the vendor and third-party assistance. Our in-house team used relevant intelligence to ensure successful deployment.

Two major teams were primarily involved: the InfoSec team and the IT team. The InfoSec team covered the solution and helped the IT team with configuring best practices. Additionally, we had a partner team that implemented the solution for us.

For deployment, we followed a straightforward approach. First, we identified our known applications and domains and then planned how to integrate our account users with Netskope. Next, we used the discovery module to identify shadow IT instances. Finally, we configured policies, initially placing them in monitoring mode. Once the tools matured, we transitioned those policies from monitoring to protective mode.

The maintenance was easy. 

Pricing depends on customer relationships, negotiations, and partner involvement. Each product owner has their own licensing terms, which all play into the overall cost because they involve a partner. Overall, it depends on the negotiation skills.

Netskope's pricing is reasonable compared to Microsoft. Microsoft tends to sell individual licenses as bundles. For instance, if you're using licenses like E3 versus E5, E3 offers limited functionality, while E5 provides a bundle. Microsoft's pricing is somewhat higher, considering Netskope's capabilities as well.

I have experience with a few other solutions, like Symantec and Microsoft, but my involvement with those was limited. Netskope was the major focus.

If you're heavily invested in Microsoft, Microsoft KSP might be the way to go. Otherwise, you might consider Netskope. So, it is dependent on the infrastructure.

I'd suggest that any company not heavily dependent on Microsoft could consider starting with Netskope. Cloud journey also matters; if you're deeply involved in the cloud, Netskope is a good solution to safeguard your cloud data.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution.

For now, we are scanning all the HTTP traffic with the cloud-based solution, the cloud broker solution. We are using it as a network proxy. It will detect all the data you are using. Let's say you go to Google Drive to try to upload something. In our case, we are putting up some rules or restrictions so that you can't upload PDFs or Word files, or maybe you can add Word files with limitations, like without any personal information, including name, pin number, date of birth. It's more like we are controlling the PII, the personal information with the solution, so that we restrict users from uploading whatever they want on the internet.

The solution itself is good because it categorizes many websites on its own, like the website or solution you trust. For instance, Yahoo is a good website. You can let your employees use Yahoo, but let's say a website like yandex.com is a little bit fishy, so they will put it into a category like server content. We can put in rules according to this. We can only allow the website with Netskope first.

We have to pay extra for some of those features, but we can connect our infrastructure like GCB. We can connect our instance via API so that Netskope itself scans whatever in our GCB storage or Azure Block storage. If someone is storing PII information, it can declare some alerts or restrict access to that particular file. It's mostly for this kind of solution, but there are many other things that you can do with the solution.

We have more than 30,000 workstations. The client version is 90, but we are using 87. Every three or four months, we do an installation for all the clients and workstations. That's maybe why we are not on the latest client version, but it works fine. There haven't been any problems with that. They launch one new version every month.

Normally on your side, you don't need anything. You only need to install the client on your workstation. After that, it's up to you. If you have everything already on cloud, like if you are using Azure AD, you can connect your Azure-ready account with their account for the same purposes and upload all the data of your users so that their solutions know about your environment. If you are not using cloud, you can provide an Excel list of all your users so they can register those users so you aren't paying more than you are consuming. You can install the agents on 1,000 PCs, but they are only working with the users and environment they are deployed on.

If I have 500 users and install on 1,000 PCs, I'm only paying for 500 users because now they work from home. Everyone has one Mac, one Windows device, or maybe one Linux device, but they are using the same username with the organization. We are paying the license for one user, even if we are using the client on multiple devices. The working environment is not a big mess. If you're on hybrid or 100% cloud based, or even if you are 100% in-house in your data center, you can go with the solution. There aren't any limitations.

If you implement the solution, it will give you visibility. If you have 1,000 or 50,000 people working in your environment, you don't know what solutions people are using. Personally, I'm using OneNote and Microsoft Office, but someone might be using a text file or third party software, or using a browser extension just to take notes. 

We don't know how much we can trust third party applications. The product itself provides visibility to us. When we started back in 2019, we activated the solution for everyone, but this is not the best way for 30,000 users in one shot because we started blocking people and the work environment because people were using their own solutions and software. Netskope doesn't know those softwares so we have to integrate with them and with the third party, for which we are paying the license. Netskope says, "Okay, this is the server. We are blocking the server," but we don't know if we can trust this one or not. 

After talking with the other teams, we realized, "No, we are paying the license for it. This is legit, so we don't have to block it." 

When we started deployment, each month we deployed the traffic for 1,000 people. When it was done, we could see what they were using, consuming, and what we were blocking.

This way, we can change our policies. We try to allow the legit solutions and third party applications that we are paying the license for. Then we go to the next thousand. Then we discover what these people are doing and the applications they're using. When people tell us that they don't have access to their Gmail, we tell them that we cut out Gmail because we are only using the Microsoft services, so there is no Gmail, unless there is a reason for it.

Netskope provides visibility in our case for the deployment.

In Azure, we have multiple subscriptions and with every subscription, we add some kind of instance ID. We can work with the instance ID so that we allow all of the instances containing nodules. Everything else, we block. This way, if you go to outlook.com and check your email, if you log in with your company account, the instance ID will show. The network will take action according to the instance ID and say, "You are using the enterprise email. I'll let you surf. I'll let you see your email." But when you try to log in with your own email address, like Hotmail or Gmail, the instance ID will be different.

This way we are not completely blocking Outlook, but we are blocking people from accessing their Outlook. We are only allowing the enterprise-level emails, and we are not allowing user-based emails. That's the feature I love most.

Third party integration with other cloud applications could be improved. Sometimes the API won't be working, but Netskope is taking it seriously. They accept all the feature requests, and they are trying to provide whatever we ask from them.

What we are consuming right now is almost perfect. This is a cloud-based application, not in-house, so we can't change the interface. But for UI, sometimes we ask them to give us some more visualization and features. 

For instance, if you are uploading a dictionary and use that dictionary file containing anything from the dictionary blockage protection, we can't see it. Each time we have to upload a new one and override the old one. We can't visualize it, so we have asked them for a feature request and they're working on it.

There are many small things regarding feature requests that we are doing day to day, and they are working on it. Some of the features are there, but they are hard to find. 

The only thing we are looking for now is integration with the MacBook. Even with a MacBook, everything is going well. With a MacBook, the Catalina client is working fine. The new version, which releases monthly, is working fine. The only problem we are facing is with the big server, so they're working on it.

I have been using Netskope CASB for a year and a half. The solution auto updates. This is a test solution, so all we have to do on our side is upgrade the client version on workstations.

There haven't been any major issues. We had one issue on their backend, but they provided a solution very quickly. In about three hours, they moved us to another data center. This is normal. This was a major incident on their side because when traffic starts moving on their data center, they start scanning everything and it goes to their data center. If their data center goes down or there is limited bandwidth on their side, this can impact your organization. This happened once. We communicated with them and within three hours, they switched us to another data center. Everything was smooth and started working fine, but these kinds of things happen.

The solution is scalable. There haven't been any issues according to performance. On their side, scalability is good because it's a test solution. I can't tell you more about the scalability because it's mostly on their side. From our side, everything is more than fine because we are consuming their services.

We are currently paying for 30,000 users, or 30,000 workstations.

Right now, for all 30,000 users, we chose maybe 60 or 70 cloud applications. We are only streaming those applications. We have already deployed 5,000 users to all web traffic. This means we are streaming everything they are surfing. For the other 25,000 users, we are only scaling the traffic of 60 or 70 applications. This is how we are consuming more of the licenses.

Netskope takes control of maintenance. They send you an email about what is going on, and they will let you know that maintenance is occurring on Sandhill server for instance, or somewhere else. They give you brief downtime, but if there isn't any downtime, they connect you to another data center.

The incident that occurred was regarding the bandwidth on their side. They were lacking some bandwidth with their vendor. There hasn't been any downtime yet, and we have been using the solution for a year and a half.

Our organization pushed us to deploy the solution as soon as possible. They were ready to pay the license because there was an architect who did a comparison between two or three CASB solutions, and he chose Netskope. When we deployed, everyone was like, "We are blocking the work." So we had to limit it and start with a chunk of users. 

The only thing they are working on is integration with Mac. On the MacBook, the client horizon is not stable. Sometimes it goes down without any warning, but they are working on it.

Technical support is good. Normally when creating a ticket on their side, the response is between one or two business days, but we are paying premium support. In premium support, we have 24/7 support from their engineers. If we have trouble with something, we can just say, "Okay, we need you to call a third party with maybe a higher level of execution." They are ready to be there, but it comes with premium support. 

We had basic support. Response time is one business day, but it depends on your ticket. If you have critical severity, they will respond right away. With the premium, 24/7 support, everything is good. Their technical department is taking care of us. They are there for us every time we need them.

We haven't used any other solutions previously. This is the first CASB solution we are using at the enterprise. The Microsoft team is using MCAL, which might be similar to this solution but isn't providing all the aspects of it like PII and the third party vendor. Its controls are limited to Microsoft. I'm not sure if we are still paying the license for MCAL or not. If you compare Netskope with MCAL, Netskope also allows you to manage, whereas MCAL is just for Microsoft services.

It seems to be straightforward because we are using it with Azure AD. We already had all of our groups and users there, so we just added the Netskope application in our Azure AD, and it started gathering all the information and sending it to their databases. It seems pretty easy just for the load.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

My advice is to just go for it. In an organization of 30,000 people, you can't just deploy one product and start deploying another product and say, "Okay, we are replacing the solution with this one," because the company has already invested millions of dollars in this. 

I like the way Netskope treats its customers. Whenever you need help, they are there. They will 100% help you. They will explain everything to you. We have a meeting with our technical assistant manager every week, and he shows us different things we can do with the roadmaps, different features we can use, and what kind of policy we can put in place to lower our false positive rates. It's very helpful.