Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Appgate SDP vs Portnox comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Appgate SDP
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
ZTNA as a Service (12th), ZTNA (8th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (15th), Microsegmentation Software (7th)
Portnox
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (6th), ZTNA (9th), Passwordless Authentication (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
IgnitiusMolepo - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior IP Network Defense at MTN
Helps us manage traffic-related issues and streamlines access management for the network
Appgate SDP has significantly streamlined our access management, providing a notably efficient solution compared to traditional VPNs. The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort, unlike VPNs which often involve waiting for connection handling and unblocking. Recognizing the robustness of SDP, we made strategic decisions to minimize reliance on VPNs, reserving only two for administrative purposes. In a scenario where Appgate SDP significantly improved our network security posture, the platform played a crucial role in fortifying defenses against major threats. The encryption algorithms utilized by SDP provide a high level of security to our network architecture. Compared to Cisco, SDP proves to be most critical in protecting resources with the help of role-based policies. It only provides selective access to the application. The dynamic policy engine significantly enhances our access control mechanisms. It has single sign-on and multifactor authentication features. It makes processes faster and easier. It has helped our IT team to manage the workload with ease. It gives an intelligent solution whenever they face traffic-related problems. I rate it a nine out of ten.
reviewer9216065 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Cloud Security Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Centralized access control has simplified operations but still needs more flexible on‑prem options
Portnox has design considerations that limit its applicability. If you are in a highly regulated industry with mandates requiring the solution to be completely on-premises, Portnox does not work at all. I do not think they position their products for those industries. Even for non-heavily regulated industries, if you want a self-sufficient system within your own premises, there are design constraints because at some point you must reach out to Portnox infrastructure in the cloud, and if that is unavailable, it suffers. For example, on deep-sea oil rigs without proper connectivity, it struggles. I am not sure they want to enter that particular business segment, as it may not align with their value proposition. I cannot blindly select this product and deploy it everywhere; I must make deliberate decisions first. Portnox could improve by reducing its heavy reliance on the cloud. While I do not think they want to eliminate this aspect, a complete solution for regulated entities would include some on-premises setup that is self-sufficient and does not depend on the cloud. This is the most important improvement. Second, Portnox already has a robust integration ecosystem with many vendors, but not all. Even when integration exists, the extent varies, particularly regarding vendor-specific attributes. I have never faced challenges because my security tools and stack have been standard: Cisco, Aruba access points, Cisco switches, and UniFi, all of which work well with them. However, there is room for deeper integration when compared to tools like Cisco ISE and Aruba ClearPass. Their offerings are clear, easy to onboard, and their day zero and day one onboarding activities are streamlined and straightforward. They share best practice checklists that make configuration simple.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"The interface is really friendly. It's simple to understand."
"One of the most important features is stopping lateral movement across our network."
"It is pretty stable."
"The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort."
"The flexibility of the tool is valuable. It is very robust. It has a very robust configuration capability."
"It is a scalable solution...The support answers your questions very fast."
"The simplicity of the product is commendable."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"It's a stable product."
"The cloud-based feature is very nice. We use Meraki for our switching, and it is simple to point all of our networks and offices to Portnox. It is pretty seamless."
"The minute people have issues on their network, we can see what is happening right away."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"The technical support is top-notch."
 

Cons

"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"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."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"One thing that kind of sticks out to me is the ability to do a proper non-split tunnel. VPN tunnel-wise, it is not really a true unsplit tunnel, but I think that's just because of the way it's designed. A split VPN basically allows your system to talk to other systems without being forced down the tunnel. A VPN running in a non-split tunnel mode forces all the traffic down the tunnel to wherever you're VPNing to. It forces the traffic down so that the traffic is subject to the firewall and rules that you have in your corporate environment and such. It helps to prevent remote malicious folks that may be talking directly to that box from piggybacking into the corporate environment through it. They do it partially, but it would be nice to see more of an enterprise-level solution there."
"On the cloud, when you make some changes, it may be difficult."
"They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features to enhance remote micro connection."
"The user interface should be improved as it is not very easy to work with the updates."
"One limitation is that it's harder to provide access to multiple applications in the company with Appgate, but that's probably because of poor management."
"It would be better to connect to an application portal from any device. Documentation and support could be better."
"Ideally, we should be able to search for any MAC address in the database, regardless of its authentication status, to see all its associated groups and potential conflicts."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"The support team is very limited. They don't have much support during Asia Pacific hours; the team sits in during the EMI and US hours."
"We have seen instances where the older version stops working properly, and we have to update each system individually."
"In terms of operational efficiency, things are more complicated now. It takes more time to get devices on the network, but we increased security quite a bit."
"The integration between Portnox CORE and Portnox CLEAR can be better. These are two different systems, and there is no unique console for both devices. Portnox CORE is agentless, whereas Portnox CLEAR is not agentless."
"The product should consider more integration with vendors like Huawei. It should also improve visibility. The solution should offer a partner portal that can provide customers training on the in and out of the solution."
"The Wi-Fi integration could be done better from their end."
 

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."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is according to the market price. It is not a very cheap solution. They have some very aggressive promotions to sell the product in the market."
"We pay $100 per user per month. One license for the site is around $17."
"It is a pretty expensive tool. It is maybe about $20,000 per year for a hundred users or so."
"The licensing module should be reviewed to count the number of devices instead of port numbers of total switches. There is a case for this where not all ports for a switch are used by devices. Unused ports are calculated in the license, then the customer pays for license for those unused ports."
"The tool is more expensive than Fortinet."
"It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle."
"We pay for port licensing and support on a yearly basis, and it's not cheap."
"Portnox CORE's pricing is adequate and cheaper compared to other complex solutions. Its licensing costs are yearly and include support. Cost is calculated per device."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"Pricing is not cheap. It is based on licenses per port. After licensing is purchased, you only pay for support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
What do you like most about Appgate SDP?
The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can ...
What needs improvement with Appgate SDP?
They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features ...
What is your primary use case for Appgate SDP?
We use Appgate SDP as a substitute for traditional VPN.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox Clear?
Portnox's pricing is very conservative and offers great value for money. If I compare it with any other solution, pri...
What needs improvement with Portnox Clear?
Portnox has design considerations that limit its applicability. If you are in a highly regulated industry with mandat...
What is your primary use case for Portnox Clear?
I have predominantly used Portnox as a NAC solution for centralized, cloud-managed access control across our globally...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not 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.
United States Air Force  FINRA Weight Watchers Rackspace  DataDog SageNet  Verdant Norwegian Cruise Line  VoiceBase  The Third Floor 
Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Appgate SDP vs. Portnox and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.