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

Netskope vs Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform [EOL] comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

iboss
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Netskope
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (3rd), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (2nd)
Threat Stack Cloud Security...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
AV
Cyber security consultant at L&T Technology Services
User-friendly console integrates robust security features for seamless traffic management
Netskope serves as a single web console carrying out multiple functionalities: Zero Trust Network Architecture (ZTNA), Secure Web Gateway (SWG), Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB), Web DLP, and firewall services. I can toggle between these features on a single platform, enhancing ease of use. In comparison, Zscaler requires multiple consoles for managing similar features. Having these functionalities integrated into one dashboard makes Netskope efficient and user-friendly.
SC
Software Development Manager at Rent Dynamics
SecOps program for us, as a smaller company, is amazing; they know what to look for
They could give a few more insights into security groups and recommendations on how to be more effective. That's getting more into the AWS environment, specifically. I'm not sure if that's Threat Stack's plan or not, but I would like them to help us be efficient about how we're setting up security groups. They could recommend separation of VPCs and the like - really dig into our architecture. I haven't seen a whole lot of that and I think that's something that, right off the bat, could have made us smarter. Even as part of the SecOps Program, that could be helpful; a quick analysis. They're analyzing our whole infrastructure and saying, "You have one VPC and that doesn't make a lot of sense, that should be multiple VPCs and here's why." The architecture of the servers in whatever cloud-hosting provider you're on could be helpful. Other than that, they should continue to expand on their notifications and on what's a vulnerability. They do a great job of that and we want them to continue to do that. It would be cool, since the agent is already deployed and they know about the server, they know the IP address, and they know what vulnerability is there, for them to test the vulnerability and see if they can actually exploit it. Or, once we patch it, they could double-check that it can't be. I don't know how hard that would be to build. Thinking on it off the top off my head, it could be a little challenging but it could also be highly interesting. It would also be great if we could test a couple of other features like hammering a server with 100 login attempts and see what happens. Real test scenarios could be really helpful. That is probably more something close to what they do with the SOC 2 audit or the report. But more visualization of that, being able to test things out on our infrastructure to make sure we can or can't hit this box could be interesting.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"We use Cisco VPN for remote access. Additionally, we have started implementing Netskope with a strong focus on security. Our primary goal is to protect users from accessing malicious sites. We also plan to implement DLP based on our data, as data security is our main concern."
"I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"Netskope is highly scalable and has supported our organization's growth without any challenges."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"The most helpful features in Netskope are the data loss prevention module, the anti-malware module, and the integration that it has with Information Rights Management from Microsoft."
"The feature that I like best is the GUI."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"Every other security tool we've looked is good at containers, or at Kubernetes, is good at AWS, or at instance monitoring. But nobody is good at tying all of those things together, and that's really where Threat Stack shines."
"The rules are really great. They give us more visibility and control over what's being triggered. There's a large set of rules that come out-of-the-box. We can customize them and we can create our own rules based on the traffic patterns that we see."
"Threat Stack has connectivity."
"Technical support is very helpful."
"The number-one feature is the monitoring of interactive sessions on our Linux machines. We run an immutable environment, so that nothing is allowed to be changed in production... We're constantly monitoring to make sure that no one is violating that. Threat Stack is what allows us to do that."
"With Threat Stack, we quickly identified some AWS accounts which had services that would potentially be exposed and were able to remediate them prior to release of products."
"We're using it on container to see when activity involving executables happens, and that's great."
"There has been a measurable decrease in the meantime to remediation... because we have so many different tech verticals already collated in one place, our ability to respond is drastically different than it used to be."
 

Cons

"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 reporting feature needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"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."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"The right categorization of websites needs improvement. It is important for the solution to correctly categorize websites as genuine or non-genuine, fitting them into the right category."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"It needed some fine-tuning on core business sites that we used, which were sensitive to what we term a man-in-the-middle certificate by design. Some sites were not tolerant because they presented as potentially malicious. So, we just had to make some tweaks so that it would bypass or interpret it."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"They lack a cloud security posture management solution."
"Compatibility with other proxy polars would be helpful."
"The limitations in Zero Trust's publisher sessions are a concern. Currently, it supports only between 15,000 to 32,000 sessions."
"There is currently no DLP on-premises."
"The API - which has grown quite a bit, so we're still learning it and I can't say whether it still needs improvement - was an area that had been needing it."
"The compliance and governance need improvement."
"The user interface can be a little bit clunky at times... There's a lot of information that needs to be waded through, and the UI just isn't great."
"The solution’s ability to consume alerts and data in third-party tools (via APIs and export into S3 buckets) is moderate. They have some work to do in that area... The API does not mimic the features of the UI as far as reporting and pulling data out go. There's a big discrepancy there."
"The reports aren't very good. We've automated the report generation via the API and replaced almost all the reports that they generate for us using API calls instead."
"Some features do not work as expected."
"They could give a few more insights into security groups and recommendations on how to be more effective. That's getting more into the AWS environment, specifically. I'm not sure if that's Threat Stack's plan or not, but I would like them to help us be efficient about how we're setting up security groups. They could recommend separation of VPCs and the like - really dig into our architecture. I haven't seen a whole lot of that and I think that's something that, right off the bat, could have made us smarter."
"It shoots back a lot of alerts."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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."
"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."
"The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case."
"The pricing is competitive."
"I would rate the pricing nine out of ten."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"They should work on licensing costs."
"Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"I recall that the price was considerably cheaper than that of Zscaler. It was around 60,000 AUD for 1,000 users per year and included some training and some premier support offerings. If we wanted to take advantage of the CASB capabilities, then there was an additional subscription fee, for which we didn't have the budget. On price, I would give Netskope a three or four out of five because it's quite expensive, but it offers a lot of value."
"It came in cheaper than Trend Micro when we purchased it a few years ago."
"What we're paying now is somewhere around $15 to $20 per agent per month, if I recall correctly. The other cost we have is SecOps."
"Pricing seems to be in line with the market structure. It's fine."
"It is very expensive compared to some other products. The pricing is definitely high."
"We find the licensing and pricing very easy to understand and a good value for the services provided."
"It is a cost-effective choice versus other solutions on the market."
"I'm happy with the amount that we spend for the product that we get and the overall service that we get. It's not cheap, but I'm still happy with the spend."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
5%
Performing Arts
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
Which is better, Zscaler internet access or Netsckope CASB?
We researched Netskope but ultimately chose Zscaler. Netskope is a cloud access security broker that helps identify ...
What do you like most about Netskope CASB?
The product's analytics part is pretty fine.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Netskope CASB
Threat Stack, CSP,
 

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.
NetApp, Genomic Health, Caterpillar, Apollo, Pandora, Continental Resources, Fractal, infinera, Tesla
StatusPage.io, Walkbase, Spanning, DNAnexus, Jobcase, Nextcapital, Smartling, Veracode, 6sense
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Cisco, Netskope and others in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB). Updated: January 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.