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

Prisma Access Browser vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 15, 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 Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), ZTNA as a Service (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (6th)
Prisma Access Browser
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Browsers (1st)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (5th), ZTNA as a Service (4th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.4%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access Browser is 2.4%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 7.1%, down from 11.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks7.1%
iboss3.4%
Prisma Access Browser2.4%
Other87.1%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

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.
reviewer2750658 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant Avant Vente Cybersécurité at a comms service provider with 5,001-10,000 employees
Browser security has strengthened web DLP and protects unmanaged devices from data exfiltration
SD-WAN capability is another solution, and it is not Prisma Access Browser; we do not have SD-WAN capability with Prisma Access Browser. I would like to improve the private access to do the ZTNA. I think that Palo Alto has released the versions and integrated the private access in Prisma Access Browser, but I'm not sure. The feature that is missing in Prisma Access Browser is the capability to monitor the private access where a user can access a private app with authentication, posture, and granular access. Regarding the pricing aspect, many customers find that the solution is a little bit expensive. Palo Alto should reconsider the pricing as it is a bit expensive.
IgorPinter - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at PULSEC
Zero-trust access has improved remote security and now simplifies cloud-based firewall management
Regarding the integration part for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, the integration with identity providers is pretty much good. It is basically firewall as a service, so it performs well. I completed the integration without any issues. What Palo Alto Networks can do better for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is probably to have the point of presence available in more locations. The point of presence from the Serbia region has the nearest POP in Frankfurt, which is an issue since it is your gateway—when you start browsing the internet, you go through a commercial connection in Germany. They definitely need to spread the service in other countries.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"As I mentioned, the return on investment is significant, as it saved our office locations' bandwidth because when you are working remotely at home, your internet traffic routes directly to iboss and will not go to your office building, saving bandwidth bottlenecks and ensuring that issues with our building internet circuits will not impact your internet connectivity because you are directly going to the iboss data center."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"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."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"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."
"Prisma Access Browser improves security because the browser is one of the attack surfaces, it needs more security on the endpoint device and standardization of device usage, and it also helps standardize the access policy to the internet."
"The most interesting use case that interests our customers is the DLP features on Prisma Access Browser; it is a great DLP solution with watermark and prevents data exfiltration."
"Prisma Access Browser is the most capable, advanced, and flexible product."
"The stacked policies, event policies, and routing policies are easy to understand for someone with general knowledge."
"Overall, the security provided by Prisma Access is very good."
"Prisma Access does everything beautifully."
"The cloud VPN features mean we can connect everywhere and track where all our users are connecting, and Prisma Access came out with new, innovative features, including client-tracking, which was more valuable for our company and very impressive for us."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"The most valuable features are ZTNA 2.0, CASB, Threat Prevention, and Autonomous Digital Experience Management (ADAM)."
"The solution also provides traffic analysis, threat prevention, URL filtering, and segmentation. That combination is important because it enhances the protection and makes the traffic more secure. It also keeps things more up-to-date, enabling us to deal with more of the current threats."
"We had a very good experience with their solutions, especially with their endpoint protections and the next-generation firewalls."
 

Cons

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"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."
"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."
"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 easiest device I have set up was the Barracuda line of products."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"In the beginning, the solution may not be very user-friendly and could be complex."
"On a scale of one to 10, I would rate Palo Alto's customer service or technical support as three. Their support is very poor."
"Regarding the pricing aspect, many customers find that the solution is a little bit expensive."
"The maturity of the product needs improvement as the implementation is very complex."
"They could add more flexibility and improve product performance."
"The cloud setup is straightforward, and the onboarding process is much better, but the on-premises initial setup is slightly complex."
"The Cloud Managed Prisma Access needs some more enhancement."
"From any improvement perspective, the product's compatibility issues with Linux need to be resolved."
"It's not very easy to use. Sometimes it's buggy and there are problems when doing updates. The user interface is okay, but some configuration items are difficult. I would like it to be less buggy and easier to configure, to better streamline the user experience."
"The price can be reduced to make it more competitive."
"The one thing that I've been a little bit disappointed with is when we have had to open cases with Palo Alto about Prisma Access issues. Versus their other platforms, like their firewalls, where we tend to get really quick responses and very definitive answers, the few tickets I've had to open for Prisma Access have taken them longer to respond to. And they haven't necessarily given me the kind of answer I was looking for, meaning a fix to the problem."
"The one point I have deducted is because it is very hard to get support sometimes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"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."
Information not available
"I'm still comparing, but the solution is quite expensive."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution, especially when compared to other solutions like Cisco. There are no additional charges apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution."
"The solution is expensive."
"Prisma Access is a little bit expensive."
"The initial prices of Prisma Access were okay. But as soon as you start deploying Palo Alto gear, the support prices and the recurring prices, which are the major operational costs, tend to increase over time."
"This is not an expensive product and everything is included with one license."
"The pricing is very friendly. It's not confusing to figure out your workload and how much you'd be paying for the solution."
"It is a little expensive. Because it is one of the best in the market, it is a little bit more expensive than other vendors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
914,262 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
University
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise10
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise27
 

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...
What needs improvement with Prisma Access Browser?
SD-WAN capability is another solution, and it is not Prisma Access Browser; we do not have SD-WAN capability with Pri...
What is your primary use case for Prisma Access Browser?
We are integrators, and we do not use Prisma Access Browser for our personal use or professional use; we use Prisma A...
What advice do you have for others considering Prisma Access Browser?
With granular policy enforcement, we can enforce policy for users, groups of users, or many domains; we can whitelist...
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
From my experience, Palo Alto is more expensive compared to solutions like Netskope and Triscale.
What needs improvement with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
Regarding the integration part for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, the integration with identity providers is pr...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Prisma Access, GlobalProtect, Palo Alto GlobalProtect Mobile Security Manager, Prisma SaaS by Palo Alto Networks, Prisma Access
 

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.
Lemonade, Rapyd, Telit Cinterion, Landry’s, Golden Nugget, Houston Rockets
Concord Hospital, State of Colorado, Essilor International, RheinLand Versicherungsgruppe, University of Westminster, Universidade Nove de Julho, SPAR Austria, CAME Group, ZipRealty, Greenhill & Co., IKT Agder, Aviva Stadium, Animal Logic, Management & Training Corporation, Brigham Young University Hawaii, School District of Chilliwack
Find out what your peers are saying about Prisma Access Browser vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,262 professionals have used our research since 2012.