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

NetFoundry Platform vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (6th)
NetFoundry Platform
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
23rd
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (26th)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (3rd), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA (6th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.6%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetFoundry Platform is 1.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.3%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform1.3%
iboss3.6%
NetFoundry Platform1.9%
Other93.2%
ZTNA as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.
DS
Cybersecurity Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Easy to set up, stable, and helpful for integrating the systems that require a fast and reliable connection
They can provide hardware for specific use cases because some of the NetFoundry solutions don't have the hardware. Currently, they're more into software, but some of the clients want a single brand instead of having multiple vendors. So, if they can offer hardware as well, it would be good. If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good. Their technical support can be improved. There should be a better handover of a case from one support person to another.
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.

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."
"Deploying iboss leads to good return on investment, estimated around 70% to 80%."
"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."
"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."
"The students were always protected, and the content filtering worked very well, seeming to work better than other products we had tried previously."
"iboss is definitely very good in terms of service."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"The price is very reasonable compared to others and the cloud service is free."
"It is quite stable; we don't have a problem, and in terms of reliability, we haven't encountered or heard of any issues from our customers."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is in the cloud."
"The Network as a Service that they offer is most valuable."
"Customer service is good. The Cyber Hero program ensures there is always someone available to help."
"By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, our company has been able to eliminate or consolidate security tools, such as BeyondTrust PAM, and we removed USB-Lock software by adopting ThreatLocker."
"The customer service is amazing."
"We use it most heavily for elevation control, blocking and giving rights only to certain people or devices, and not allowing the rest to access the software. Elevation control has been second to none for me."
"What sets ThreatLocker apart from competitors offering similar solutions is ringfencing. The ringfencing controls, along with the application elevation features, keep it out of the user's line of sight while still protecting them."
"The single pane of glass management for all this functionality is really the best feature, as it unifies many utilities that would have been separate costs before and lets us sleep at night knowing that things are being monitored 24 hours."
"ThreatLocker saves me a couple of hours per day dealing with threats and encrypting efforts elsewhere."
"Overall, everything is excellent, and everything is well-prepared, from the laptops provided to the overall setup."
 

Cons

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"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."
"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 problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices; it is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents, and that is where in 2025 we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform."
"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"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."
"The solution could provide internet access control."
"If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good."
"There could be options for handling a bulk amount of machines simultaneously."
"It's very annoying to uninstall. You have to go into the online control panel and disable tampering for a device before it'll let you uninstall it without complaining really loudly."
"Some reporting areas need improvement. We need to generate more reports."
"The biggest thing I would like to see improved in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is reporting."
"This is my first Zero Trust conference, and so far, it has been good. The only thing I have noticed is that sometimes they encounter technical issues. For example, in one of the demo labs, the laptop trying to connect to the projector was not working, which affected the demonstration of the victim versus attacker laptop scenarios. It would be helpful to fix these issues."
"Identifying areas of improvement is challenging, however, perhaps adding a few more built-ins could help."
"We also have customers who are frustrated because they cannot do what they used to do, which was run anything they wanted to."
"I have not seen a return on investment yet, but there is a small amount of time saved because of fewer dashboards."
 

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 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 expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The price is very reasonable compared to others and the cloud service is free."
"I don't have the cost, but in terms of its management viability, it is acceptable for most of our clients. It seems quite fair."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise10
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business59
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
I think iboss could be improved by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible, and simplifying troubl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
I use iboss as a cloud-based secure web gateway to provide secure internet access, web filtering, and protect remote ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
My experience with iboss's pricing structure, setup cost, and licensing model has been positive, straightforward, and...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I am not sure about operational or cost expenses because we have not really experienced that.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
When it comes to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's policy making, it is very granular, but the moment you zoom out, ...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's main use case for us was data storage access control.We used ThreatLocker Zero Tru...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
NetFoundry Edge Router
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

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.
Ominimo, Rhapsody, TZ, LVT, CERM, Digibee
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about NetFoundry Platform vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.