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

Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

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
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Symantec Zero Trust Network...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
22nd
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Access Management (27th), ZTNA (22nd)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
4th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (6th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.5%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) is 2.1%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform1.2%
iboss3.5%
Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)2.1%
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.
cto543714 - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Restricts access to applications but improvement is needed in integrations
Over the last year, I have been working with customers because it's changing and maturing. These things are rolled out in segments and chunks, not all at once. Additional internal work is often required to make it functional, such as properly configuring the active directory. This internal work can take up to three months. The process varies, and implementing Symantec ZTNA quickly is not realistic. I wouldn't recommend the tool to non-core customers because you won't get the support you need. I'd rate Symantec ZTNA a seven on a scale of one to ten. They're still integrating different pieces into their solution. The challenge with ZTNA is that different companies implement it slightly differently, with some features present in one product but missing in another. ZTNA is a tricky acronym that companies use, but when you look closely, you find that each vendor might only have some of the expected features.
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

"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"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."
"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 security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"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."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"The most valuable feature of this product is restricting and controlling what people have access to. If I want a contractor to connect to my network, I can give them access to only the specific things they need without giving them full VPN access to my entire network. That's the main benefit everyone gets from it. The value depends on how many users and applications you have and what you want to share."
"The most valuable feature is selective elevation, which allows elevating an individual process to admin privilege without granting admin privilege to that user, which has been by far the most useful feature outside of the overall solution itself."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has absolutely helped my company save on operational costs and expenses."
"I think it could really take over a lot of security functionality in our company."
"The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform offers is that the entire platform is perfect, it is very user-friendly and helps us manage our endpoints easily, and the parts that stand out for my team are elevation, password rotation, and application control."
"For companies that are considering ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my advice would be to go for it, as it truly changes how you secure your clients and offers more opportunities to provide services to clients that were not feasible before."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs and expenses."
"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."
"Overall, everything is excellent, and everything is well-prepared, from the laptops provided to the overall setup."
 

Cons

"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"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 endpoint-type solution is an area that needs some improvement."
"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."
"For areas of improvement, the main issue is with integrations. The Symantec ZTNA comprises many products cobbled together on the back end. Sometimes, the integrations work well; sometimes, they don't. For example, if you want to use two-factor authentication, you need to integrate that into the solution. Or if you want to accept protocols other than web coming to your secure gateway, that's another integration. Supporting different devices like Macs, Samsung phones, or iPhones also requires more integrations. Ensuring all these integrations work properly is an ongoing process and a moving target."
"I have several clients in the last few months that have definitely caused a problem where a domain controller completely destroyed replication once Network Control was put in place, and now our AVD servers in Azure also lose domain trust occasionally and it is intermittent, making it rather hard to prove to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that they really need to look at when there is a VPN in the middle of a domain controller."
"I think ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved with an identity and multi-factor authentication module so that it can help manage situations when you elevate a command prompt to run as an administrator by incorporating its own MFA into that process."
"The biggest thing I would like to see improved in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is reporting."
"We use other vendors for other components. I'd like one vendor to control all aspects of the business, including backup, EDR solutions, email monitoring, and control, rather than using multiple vendors."
"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."
"I have encountered some problems with stability, however, they are resolved quickly."
"It is a little frustrating on my end since I like to go as quickly as I possibly can, and it slows me down."
"The user experience could be improved. Most complaints we get are based on users wanting certain functionality."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"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 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."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"Pricing varies depending on the situation. In competitive situations, it's usually priced competitively. Nobody pays the full MSRP. Typically, you negotiate and work with them on the pricing."
"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."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"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."
"So far, it has been great. I have no complaints. Of course, everybody wishes it was cheaper."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Construction Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise8
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business53
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
Pricing varies depending on the situation. In competitive situations, it's usually priced competitively. Nobody pays ...
What needs improvement with Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
For areas of improvement, the main issue is with integrations. The Symantec ZTNA comprises many products cobbled toge...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
The solution helps to allow access only to what is explicitly needed. This means restricting access to specific appli...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is goo...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has been fairly good with not a lot of complaints. If I have to s...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I currently work in the Enterprise GitLab platform for Scania where we have a lot of users using our GitLab platform ...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Symantec Secure Access Cloud, Luminate.io, Luminate
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

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.
NEX, AIG, Fiverr, Upwork
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Zscaler, Okta, Cisco and others in ZTNA as a Service. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.