Netskope Private Access vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Netskope and ThreatLocker are both solutions in the ZTNA as a Service category. Netskope is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.5, while ThreatLocker is ranked #5 with an average rating of 9.2. Netskope holds a 2.3% mindshare in ZaaS, compared to ThreatLocker’s 1.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Netskope users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 99% of ThreatLocker users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 2026

Netskope Private Access and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform compete in the network security domain. ThreatLocker has the upper hand due to its extensive feature set and scalability, deemed worth the cost, contrasting with Netskope's favorable pricing and rapid deployment advantages.

Features: Netskope Private Access offers seamless cloud integration, secure access capabilities, and granular control over application usage. ThreatLocker provides strong configurability, endpoint security, and advanced security controls that allow for detailed policy enforcement and tailored security management.

Room for Improvement: Netskope could enhance its control capabilities and scalability to match ThreatLocker's strengths. Moreover, improving configurability and reducing complexity in deployment could benefit users. For ThreatLocker, simplifying its comprehensive setup process and enhancing smoother integration could address its initial complexities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Netskope benefits from a straightforward cloud-based deployment model with responsive customer support, making it easy and quick to set up. ThreatLocker, while more complex in setup due to its customizable nature, provides adequate support resources that aid in overcoming deployment challenges.

Pricing and ROI: Netskope Private Access offers competitive pricing with immediate ROI due to its rapid deployment model. ThreatLocker, though potentially costlier initially, promises long-term value with robust security controls that justify the higher cost through reliable ROI and enhanced scalability and security features.

To learn more, read our detailed Netskope Private Access vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,769 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 November 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.4%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 2.3%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform	1.4%
iboss	3.4%
Netskope Private Access	2.3%
Other	92.9%

ZTNA as a Service

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

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.

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

Santo Joy

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.

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

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

"I would say iboss is a very good product; its scalability is very good, and it's seamless for the user."

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."

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

"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."

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."

"The iboss solution gives me the ability to scan the traffic through all the ports, through all the 131,000 PCP and UDP ports, and with this ability, we have the granularity also for consults over social media and applications on mobile, and this is an advantage that the customers are looking for right now."

More iboss pros

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

"The product's scalability is good."

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

"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."

"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."

"It is a stable solution."

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

"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

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is a very nice platform, and we are very satisfied as customers with how it is helping us."

"Blocking is done comprehensively."

"The biggest one that we focus on is the application control with ringfencing. That combination is very beneficial."

"I really enjoy ringfencing and elevation features. It makes my life easier because I do not have to get on a computer to elevate a prompt to allow users to run something they run every day as an admin."

"The application management on any workstation with the solution is valuable. I find it valuable that it indicates whether the software is part of our pre-approved list, adding a nice layer of protection. It works great because people cannot just install or download any app from the web."

"ThreatLocker's most valuable feature is its scanning capability, which executes all types of executable files."

"I would evaluate the customer service and technical support from ThreatLocker as phenomenal; it's white glove service, better than any other security product we've owned."

"The sandbox functionality is fantastic."

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform pros

Cons

"I would rate iboss an eight out of ten because it provides strong cloud-based security threat protection, centralized policy management, and visibility into web traffic. I would give it a higher rating if automation, reporting, and troubleshooting capabilities could be improved further."

"I have heard they are doing DDoS filtering, but I am not certain if they are implementing it correctly."

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

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"Its pricing could be better."

More iboss cons

"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."

"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."

"Netskope detects certain data or contents, but there are some limitations on how we can customize those policies for DLP."

"Netskope needs to provide some kind of data protection strategy as well because, currently, if you connect through private access, we don't have any data protection policies or implementation."

"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."

"The product is not easy to use."

"The solution needs to develop faster features. Its interoperability feature is not working. It takes six months to one year for any product to implement the improvements. However, the process should be faster to implement the changes quickly."

"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."

More Netskope Private Access cons

"Scalability is challenging, not due to the platform. Scaling ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform usage requires dedicated resources for maintenance."

"More visibility in the built-ins would be nice."

"I took off one point because sometimes it can be a bit complicated for new engineers, such as my teammates, especially for those who don't have hands-on experience."

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has reduced some of the operational costs in my company in terms of time spent on tickets, but nothing major."

"I assess the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites as fair. There are a few false positives."

"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."

"I think one point that could be improved is the maintenance window."

"From my perspective, the initial setup and policy configuration of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform could be more intuitive, especially for new users."

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

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

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

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

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

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

"The pricing of the solution is cheap."

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

More Netskope Private Access pricing and cost advice

"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."

"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."

"The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long."

"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."

"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."

"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 do not know about the licensing and price as it comes bundled from our MSP. However, it seems fairly reasonable for us, which is why we chose it."

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform 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

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	15

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	73
Midsize Enterprise	21
Large Enterprise	23

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

iboss could be improved by making the dashboard more user-friendly, providing more detailed real-time alerts, and imp...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

iboss is primarily used for cloud security, helping to protect users when they access websites and cloud applications...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

The pricing and licensing for iboss were reasonable for the security features. The setup costs were manageable, thoug...

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it is owned by my...

See all answers

What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?

I believe ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's marketing strategy has to be changed because only fewer organizations, s...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?

My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it helps to prevent somebody from accessing scripts. It...

See all answers

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 5% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 14% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 11% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 9% of the time

Appgate SDP vs Netskope Private Access

Compared 7% of the time

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

Compared 5% of the time

More Netskope Private Access Competitors

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

Intercept X Endpoint vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

Airlock Digital Application Control vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Compared 3% of the time

More ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

October 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access

October 2026

Download Netskope Private Access product report

Buyer's Guide

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

October 2026

Download ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing

Overview

iboss is the Zero Trust SASE platform that gives organizations complete visibility and governance over their AI, data, and applications through one unified platform, one console, one policy engine, and one data lake.

Your endpoints may already stop malware. Your data and application activity can still be invisible. iboss decrypts and understands every connection, then turns that signal into answers security leaders can act on.

The platform leads with three capabilities in this order: AI Security and Visibility, Data Security and Visibility, and App Visibility and Control. Zero Trust Network Access, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN sit underneath as the access fabric that carries those three. Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

- AI Security and Visibility: conversation capture, shadow-AI discovery, AI DLP, and agent governance across Claude, Co-Work, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok, and emerging services.

- Data Security and Visibility: full SSL/TLS decryption, deep content inspection, MIP label compliance, and one-click compliance reporting.

- App Visibility and Control: signatureless CASB, dual risk scoring, in-app controls, and SSPM for major SaaS.

- Containerized Zero Trust SASE: dedicated containers, isolated SSL keys, one console, one policy engine, one data lake.

- Access fabric: ZTNA, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN under the same platform.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

- Complete visibility over AI, data, and applications from one platform instead of separate point tools.

- Encrypted traffic is inspected by default so data decisions use content and context together.

- Shadow SaaS and new web tools appear as they are used, with enforceable controls in one console.

- Native data sovereignty through dedicated containers, in-region inspection, and per-customer SSL key custody.

- Scale proven in published materials: 10M+ users, 100+ countries, 150B+ transactions, 2.5B+ threats blocked.

Economic buyers are CISOs, CIOs, and VPs of Security. Champions include security architects, network and infrastructure leaders, SecOps, and GRC. Primary segments: enterprise and business, financial services, government (including FedRAMP Gov Cloud), healthcare, manufacturing, legal and professional services, retail and hospitality, and MSP/MSSP partners. Education, including K-12, is one vertical among these.

iboss

Netskope Private Access is innovatively designed to offer secure remote access by eliminating inbound connectivity risks and requiring minimal maintenance, focusing on specific access controls and real-time adaptive policies.

Netskope Private Access stands out for its approach to securing connectivity without using conventional VPNs. It grants granular application access, implements adaptive policies, and ensures low latency with unrestricted bandwidth. Enhanced security features like device checks, Data Loss Protection, and content filtering align with its standard pricing. Meanwhile, its integration capabilities, although complex, facilitate secure connections to internal resources such as Active Directory, supporting compliance standards while migrating from legacy VPN solutions.

What are the key features of Netskope Private Access?

No Inbound Connectivity: Eliminates risks of unauthorized access.
Granular Application Access: Provides specific and detailed access control.
Adaptive Policies: Real-time policy adjustments based on user and device context.
Device Checks: Enhances security with thorough verification measures.
Data Loss Protection & Content Filtering: Protects sensitive data and monitors traffic content.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Secure Remote Access: Ensures safe connectivity for remote workforces.
Performance Optimization: Offers seamless, low-latency connectivity.
Scalability and Flexibility: Adapts easily to growing remote access demands.
Simplified Management: Streamlines management without traditional VPN issues.

In sectors like finance and healthcare, organizations deploy Netskope Private Access to enable secure remote access while maintaining compliance. These industries benefit by facilitating remote connections to critical internal applications, reducing downtime and inefficiencies typically associated with VPNs. Industries also leverage adaptive policies to ensure compliance with security protocols and real-time monitoring of remote access.

Netskope

Gain proactive, industry leading Zero Trust cybersecurity capabilities with ThreatLocker. By employing a deny-by-default approach, you will greatly enhance your security and operational efficiency. Solutions from ThreatLocker are focused on precise application control and
streamlined access management without administrative rights.

ThreatLocker Application Control solutions include Zero Trust Alllowlisting, Zero Trust Ringfencing and Privilege Access Management, significantly reducing any unauthorized software activities in your environment. Granular controls improve your overall security, while ringfencing enhances application behavior monitoring. Elevation requests will allow users to gain administrative access without IT intervention. The platform's ease of policy management and real-time threat visibility contribute to reduced help desk tickets and operational costs, ensuring protection against ransomware and
unauthorized applications.

What are the key features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform?

Zero Trust Allowlisting: Allows detailed allowlisting for specific application use.
Privilege Access Management: Streamlines administrative access requests without IT involvement.
Ringfencing: Monitors application behavior to prevent unauthorized actions.
USB access and Data storage Control: Ensures comprehensive endpoint security across networks.

What benefits and ROI should users expect?

Enhanced Security: Reduces your daily risks through deny-by-default policies and ransomware protection.
Operational Efficiency: Your overall number of help desk tickets and operational costs will be cut down.
Compliance Assurance: You maintain compliance by preventing unauthorized software actions.

Organizations often deploy ThreatLocker to ensure endpoint security in industries requiring stringent application control and administrative access management. Its functionalities are critical for managing Shadow IT, creating policies, and overseeing software installation approvals. Common usage spans sectors demanding robust security and compliance, such as finance and healthcare, where maintaining high
security and efficiency is crucial.

ThreatLocker

Sample Customers

Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Private Access vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

September 2026

Free Report: Netskope Private Access vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope Private Access vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Netskope Private Access vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform 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.