Netskope Private Access vs Odo comparison

Netskope and Check Point Software Technologies are both solutions in the ZTNA as a Service category. Netskope is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.5, while Check Point Software Technologies is ranked #23. Netskope holds a 3.7% mindshare in ZaaS, compared to Check Point Software Technologies’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Netskope users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Check Point Software Technologies users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

Netskope Private Access and Odo are both under consideration for their strengths in private access solutions. Netskope Private Access gains positive feedback for its features and deployment, while Odo is preferred by users for its pricing and ROI.

What features are offered by Netskope Private Access in comparison to Odo?

Netskope Private Access users value its comprehensive security policies, user activity monitoring, and security controls. Odo users highlight its seamless connectivity, integration with existing infrastructure, and integration capabilities.

What areas of improvement can be found in Netskope Private Access in comparison to Odo?

Netskope Private Access users request enhancements in product scalability, support documentation, and scalability improvements. Odo users look for better detailed analytics, more extensive customer support, and better user analytics.

How is the ease of deployment and customer service of Netskope Private Access in comparison to Odo?

Netskope Private Access deployment is appreciated for its straightforward implementation but has mixed reviews on customer service responsiveness. Odo’s deployment model is noted for being quick and efficient, with positive feedback on customer support.

What setup costs and ROI can be seen with Netskope Private Access in comparison to Odo?

Netskope Private Access users express concerns about high initial setup costs but report good long-term ROI. Odo’s pricing is seen as more competitive and transparent, with solid ROI feedback.

To learn more, read our detailed Netskope Private Access vs. Odo Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access vs. Odo

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 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 March 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.4%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 3.7%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Odo is 1.0%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
iboss	2.4%
Netskope Private Access	3.7%
Odo	1.0%
Other	92.9%

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

Prathamesh Samant

Presales Manager at a manufacturing company with 201-500 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

William Cambronero

Consultant at ITQS

Great security, helpful for remote teams, and easy to set up

They should improve the latency of the portal. It takes time to enter. Other than that, the tool with us has fulfilled each of the expectations or even more than we had planned. Apart from maintaining an updated database with all the vulnerabilities that exist or that they come out day by day that is a plus since we can trust that we are keeping our information in good hands. It is clear that trends are changing day by day and year by year, and yet Check Point is always one step ahead with its competencies, providing us with the best quality in security. Something that we have noticed in some applications is the need to improve vulnerability reports. Even though they display a lot of information, they should improve it, like, for example, SIEMS. Another point of improvement is to centralize the configuration interfaces into a single pane since sometimes a point is being configured, and you have to move to another point to finish the configuration. That should be within the same administrative panel.

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

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."

"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."

"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."

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

"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."

"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."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

More iboss pros

"Netskope Private Access covers a wide range of use cases with solutions for client-server and server-to-client connectivity patterns."

"The most valuable feature is being able to see who is accessing the application, whether it is a managed device or a bring-your-own-device published by Netskope."

"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."

"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."

"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."

"The product's scalability is good."

"In the firewall, we don't have a user-based policies list, and we can't create them. Netskope helps us to create user-based policies. For example, if there are specific teams like HR or more than nine teams, and we want logs from access over particular URLs, and we don't want to allow that specific URL for certain users, we can create these policies in Netskope. It's handy, easy to use for new users, and has a cool GUI interface. We can create multiple policies, and as for the proxy, it's a leading solution."

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

More Netskope Private Access pros

"The advanced protection, centralized administration, and the ability to have experts hand in hand providing us with good best practice solutions and centralized management have been useful."

"The solution is stable and without any issues at this moment."

"Odo helped us a lot to be able to efficiently, effectively, and robustly have our employees who will work from their homes in times of the pandemic."

"We have access to great functionality while establishing a remote connection."

Cons

"The dashboards for local use could be better."

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

"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."

"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."

"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."

"Its pricing could be better."

"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."

More iboss cons

"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."

"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."

"I would like to see them go down the path of including SD-WAN. Currently, they don't do SD-WAN. If they could somehow natively do that inside of the platform, that would be amazing. I don't know if they're going to do it, but it would be amazing if they do."

"The product is not easy to use."

"The main challenge we are facing across various Trust Network Access (TNA) technologies, including Netskope, is their inability to support broadcast applications or those relying on broadcasting protocols."

"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."

"The cost has room for improvement."

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

More Netskope Private Access cons

"They should centralize the configuration interfaces into a single pane since sometimes a point is being configured, and you have to move to another point to finish the configuration."

"Scalability is very limited."

"We'd like this simplified to provide a prompt and efficient installation since, in many cases, the solution or the guides provided by the manufacturer are a bit complex."

"Until now, I have not found anything that I do not like about this service, however, security trends and vulnerabilities will always exist and there should always be new ways to protect the perimeters of our corporate infrastructure."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

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

"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."

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

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

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

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

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

"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."

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

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

"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."

More Netskope Private Access pricing and cost advice

Information not available

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

884,873 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

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Insurance Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Large Enterprise	2

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 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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 26% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 16% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 10% of the time

Cloudflare One vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 8% of the time

Google Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 3% of the time

More Netskope Private Access Competitors

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Odo

Compared 17% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Odo

Compared 17% of the time

Okta Platform vs Odo

Compared 12% of the time

Skyhigh Security vs Odo

Compared 12% of the time

Cisco Duo vs Odo

Compared 10% of the time

More Odo Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

March 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access

March 2026

Download Netskope Private Access product report

Buyer's Guide

ZTNA as a Service

February 2026

Download Odo product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

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

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

Check Point provides organizations of all sizes with the latest data and network security protection in an integrated next generation firewall platform, reducing complexity and lowering the total cost of ownership. Whether you need next-generation security for your data center, enterprise, small business or home office, Check Point has a solution for you.

Check Point Software Technologies

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.

Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy

Daymark, Datastream

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access vs. Odo

March 2026

Free Report: Netskope Private Access vs. Odo

Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope Private Access vs. Odo and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Netskope Private Access vs. Odo 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.