Jamf Connect vs Netskope Private Access comparison

JAMF and Netskope are both solutions in the ZTNA as a Service category. JAMF is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.0, while Netskope is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.5. JAMF holds a 1.9% mindshare in ZaaS, compared to Netskope’s 3.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of JAMF users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Netskope users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

Jamf Connect and Netskope Private Access both compete in identity management and security solutions. Netskope Private Access appears to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive security features and zero-trust model.

Features: Jamf Connect allows seamless Apple ID integration, provides single sign-on, and synchronizes passwords across cloud services. Netskope Private Access offers zero-trust network access, advanced data protection, and application-level access control.

Room for Improvement: Jamf Connect could enhance Windows compatibility, improve its UI, and expand integration with non-Apple devices. Netskope Private Access may benefit from simplifying deployment, reducing costs, and broadening API functionalities for third-party integrations.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Jamf Connect is favored for its easy deployment on Apple devices and responsive customer service. Netskope Private Access, while more complex to set up, offers extensive support for diverse environments, ensuring comprehensive guidance.

Pricing and ROI: Jamf Connect provides cost-effective solutions for Apple-centric businesses, offering significant ROI within this niche. Netskope Private Access involves higher initial costs but rewards with long-term value through extensive security, suitable for organizations with broader security needs.

To learn more, read our detailed Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 peers since 2012

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

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.3%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Jamf Connect is 1.9%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 3.7%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

ZTNA as a Service Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
iboss	2.3%
Netskope Private Access	3.7%
Jamf Connect	1.9%
Other	92.1%

ZTNA as a Service

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851

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.

Read full review

Joost Van 'T Wout

Senior Endpoint Engineer (macOS/Jamf) at PVH Corp.

Customizable and good password management but needs better user-level profile deployment

The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However, due to some limitations with the enrollment sequence and user limitations, we decided to discontinue using it We previously used Jamf Connect to synchronize local accounts with…

Read full review

Prathamesh Samant

Presales Manager at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

Has ensured secure remote access through real-time device checks and policy controls

There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support, it is quite easy to integrate. Wherever customization is needed, it depends on the openness of the application being integrated with. If the other application has an open architecture where you have easy API integrations, then it becomes easier. However, in some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope. They can introduce the DLP feature for Netskope Private Access. Zscaler has that DLP feature. It is in their roadmap, but currently, they don't have it. If they have data protection or data loss prevention within their NPA, that would be a significant advantage.

Read full review

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."

"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."

"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."

"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."

"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."

"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."

"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."

More iboss pros

"Jamf Connect allowed us to fully customize everything, offering a branded way to change passwords and manage integration with Entra instead of LDAP."

"It's connection with Azure is the most valuable. It is easy to deploy and connect."

"The tool supports different types of authentication. It also integrates seamlessly if you are using other Jamf products."

"Jamf Connect allows for easy and seamless joining of Mac devices to Azure AD, eliminating the need for third-party involvement or support engineer assistance."

"It's a good and stable tool, so you should use it if you have a need."

"The solution is scalable."

"The most valuable feature is ease of access. It's convenient to do things like resetting passwords. Previously, users were bound to their domain. We had to bind the user to the domain and log them in through the AD. Now, using Jamf Connect, we don't face any of these challenges. Resetting passwords is hassle-free so we can regularly rotate passwords according to best practices."

"I would rate the product's scalability an eight out of ten."

More Jamf Connect pros

"The initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."

"In the VPN scenario, what was happening, the user would get back to the complete source. But in NPA, the application will go to the user. There is an outbound connection. There is no inbound. Storage providers are also not there. It's the best feature because it is the replacement of the VPN."

"There are several valuable features, like advanced security protections, especially the DLP (Data Loss Protection), and there's also browser and web filtering, or content filtering for our users to protect them when accessing certain links or websites, ensuring their security and permission."

"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."

"It is a stable solution."

"The product's scalability is good."

"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."

"The main benefit for users from Netskope Private Access would be secure access from anywhere; they can easily access their systems or applications in their office premises or on-premises environment in a very secure way and the organization can also be assured knowing that whatever access they have been providing to their remote users goes through proper checks and balances before access is provided."

More Netskope Private Access pros

Cons

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."

"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."

"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."

"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."

"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."

"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."

"The dashboards for local use could be better."

"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."

More iboss cons

"The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However, due to some limitations with the enrollment sequence and user limitations, we decided to discontinue using it."

"The solution’s technical support is bad and should be improved."

"When a Mac is joined to Azure, the generic Pro console in the MDM should accurately display the Mac as joined to Azure in the inventory section. Currently, it shows "no domain account found," which can be misleading."

"What can be improved is the login banner resizing. Currently, it is not fully compatible and could benefit from being a full-screen size banner on the Mac device."

"The logs are an area with a shortcoming."

"The configuration could be faster."

"The solution needs to improve its licensing."

"There is room for improvement with Jamf Connect in reducing its cost and overcoming limitations during pre-stage enrollment, which prevent it from creating MDM-capable users."

More Jamf Connect cons

"In some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope."

"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."

"The major problem that we are facing is if we deploy Netskope on the server level or if we get a new server in the EMEA factor, it will affect all the machines. Recently, this has caused us to fail some reviews."

"Netskope Private Access allows mapping only one DNS server. If a user uses a secondary DNS on-premises, Netskope fails to disconnect them. This is an issue that needs to be addressed."

"Netskope Private Access could improve by enhancing visibility of user performance and application performance. It should also integrate wider DLP and inspection engines on private access traffic."

"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."

"The product is not easy to use."

"The ability to provide more security around agentless access has room for improvement."

More Netskope Private Access cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."

"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 not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."

"I rate the cost as three out of ten, with ten being the highest."

"Jamf Connect has a yearly licensing cost, which is expensive."

"The pricing is definitely on the higher side."

"The pricing model could be improved, especially considering the availability of alternative MDM solutions like Kandji, which offers similar features for free or at a lower cost."

"The pricing is good."

"We pay 2 dollars per device monthly. For the plus version, you have to pay 4 dollars per month. I think the product will give discounts based on the number of users and devices."

"The solution's price is reasonable."

"It's relatively inexpensive."

"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."

"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."

"It is significantly cost-effective compared to its contenders."

"The pricing of the solution is cheap."

"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."

"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."

"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."

"It is not the most expensive option, being more affordable than Zscaler, but it's also not the most budget-friendly choice available."

More Netskope Private Access pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Healthcare Company

Performing Arts

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	9

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Jamf Connect?

Jamf Connect requires a per-device license fee, which becomes quite expensive given our large company size. Each devi...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Jamf Connect?

There is room for improvement with Jamf Connect in reducing its cost and overcoming limitations during pre-stage enro...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Jamf Connect?

The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However,...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Netskope Private Access?

There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Netskope Private Access?

For secure remote access for people who are working out of the office, remotely, or traveling, my clients mostly use ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Private Access?

I work with a system integrator, and nowadays, we have all these solutions in our portfolio for our customers. At tha...

See all answers

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 12% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Okta Platform vs Jamf Connect

Compared 22% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Jamf Connect

Compared 11% of the time

Lookout vs Jamf Connect

Compared 6% of the time

Sendbird vs Jamf Connect

Compared 6% of the time

Zimperium vs Jamf Connect

Compared 6% of the time

More Jamf Connect Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 33% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 14% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 12% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 8% of the time

JumpCloud vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 3% of the time

More Netskope Private Access Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

January 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Jamf Connect

January 2026

Download Jamf Connect product report

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access

January 2026

Download Netskope Private Access product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

Wandera, Wandera Private Access

No data available

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Wandera Threat Defense helps businesses ensure a productive workforce, by defending both managed and unmanaged devices against the full spectrum of mobile threats. The solution includes security protections on the device and in the network, allowing for effective and targeted policy actions against even the most sophisticated attacks. Wandera Threat Defense is powered by MI:RIAM, a leading threat intelligence engine that learns in real-time through signals from 425 million sensors around the globe.

JAMF

Netskope Private Access is an integral component of the Netskope Security Cloud platform that provides zero-trust secure access to enterprise applications and data in hybrid IT (public cloud and data center) environments. It offers comprehensive policy management, compliance assessment, and supports any application, protocol, and device to reduce risk and simplify security operations.

Netskope

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.

Mastercard, Deloitte, PayPal, Toshiba, BNP Paribas, EY, Otis, Rollins, Eurostar, Frontier, Sealy, Rolex, VITAS Healthcare

Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy

Buyer's Guide

Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access

December 2025

Free Report: Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access

Find out what your peers are saying about Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access report.

See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors.

We monitor all ZTNA as a Service reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.