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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform vs Veritas Alta SaaS Protection comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (4th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
31st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
SaaS Backup (25th), SaaS Management Platforms (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.8%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is 1.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.8%
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection1.8%
Other95.4%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
SG
Technical Manager at Rigor Systems Limited
Experience with offsite backup enhances data integrity and reduces on-premise reliance
One of the features of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection that customers are looking for is immutability. This is the most important feature. With the cloud, Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is actually in the cloud, which means they have unlimited space to do their backups. They can expand on a need-to-need basis. The automated recovery feature of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection makes the recovery much easier, as opposed to earlier methods where we were using scripts to do the restore. Currently, it's automated so you just do a click. You select the feature in a graphical interface, making it easy to use even for a newbie.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ThreatLocker Allowlisting has all of these features integrated into one console, making it effective."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has definitely saved us on operational costs and expenses by preventing incidents."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"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."
"Essentially, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is super easy to use, very informative, and it does everything quickly and easily."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The control list is the best feature. For our company, it provides value to our customers since they can see we are improving our security."
"Overall, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has significantly strengthened our endpoint security by enforcing zero trust principles while maintaining operational flexibility and user productivity."
"he most valuable feature is that it's not so intrusive with computer resources."
"The most valuable feature is that it is simple to use."
"I would recommend this solution because it covers the total scope of Office 365."
"Some of the tool's best features include an enhanced dashboard and strong security features compared to native Veritas. Our environment is entirely automated."
"Veritas is loaded with features because the appliance is ready to integrate with the cloud in cases where the customers have a hybrid or cloud environment."
"It excels in performance and delivery but they are quiet on the market."
"The automated recovery feature of Veritas Alta SaaS Protection makes the recovery much easier, as opposed to earlier methods where we were using scripts to do the restore."
"It offers general business continuity and disaster recovery for the industry."
 

Cons

"I'm not sure if I'm using it wrong; however, I find that I have to babysit it too much."
"More visibility in the built-ins would be nice."
"The reason I would not give it a ten is that I believe there is still room for improvement in areas such as automated policy creation, application troubleshooting, and enterprise endpoint management integrations and reporting."
"Another thing is that ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is not an entire DLP replacement."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is very stable with many releases related to ThreatLocker agent. However, it does consume a lot of storage and memory on physical devices as it stores all policy data, which can take up to five, ten, fifteen, or twenty GB, and this can lead to high CPU usage at times."
"Scalability is challenging, not due to the platform. Scaling ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform usage requires dedicated resources for maintenance."
"There are some programs that, when they update, they hit other folders; it would be nice to be able to see where that application is pointing when it wants to update, especially if it's updating in the AppData folder or C Windows folder since it might be the same application already whitelisted, but it changes around."
"My impression of the solution's allow listing feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it's a little finicky when dealing with software that is proprietary and is updated regularly."
"They should review the cost aspect of the subscription for Veritas Alta SaaS Protection because customers are going for the cheaper storage, which doesn't give those features in terms of dedup ratios."
"In the future, we would like to see support for virtualized machines."
"Licensing has been a struggle."
"The program is quite expensive and I am not impressed by their technical support."
"The backup reports and the dashboard need improvement."
"An area for improvement is the product's performance, especially how long it takes to do a job."
"The tool can be improved in terms of maintainability and flexibility, especially as companies grow larger. In these aspects, I feel Veeam is better for cloud and operational purposes."
"The implementation could be improved. The server setup is very easy, but some specific client implementation, for example, Oracle or SQL servers, are a little bit complicated. they should offer a bit more assistance with the setup for these particular items."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"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."
"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 believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"So far, it has been great. I have no complaints. Of course, everybody wishes it was cheaper."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"This solution is not cheap and not expensive but priced in the mid-range."
"I would rate this solution's pricing as five out of five."
"The tool is expensive compared to Veeam."
"The program is quite expensive."
"SaaS Backup isn't the most expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

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 organization, so I am not certain about the pricing and licensing details. Howe...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I believe ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's marketing strategy has to be changed because only fewer organizations, such as small and mid-scale organizations, have been using it right now. It has t...
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 will allow access if it is a valid one; otherwise, we can reject it. This helps...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veritas Alto SaaS Protection?
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is slightly expensive, but they can do more on it. The exact figure for Veritas Alta SaaS Protection depends on the size of data being stored, the region, and the type ...
What needs improvement with Veritas Alto SaaS Protection?
For Veritas Alta SaaS Protection, the only challenge is downtime and the impact of time synchronization whereby different customers are on different time zones, and Veritas Alta SaaS Protection is ...
What is your primary use case for Veritas Alto SaaS Protection?
For the customers that I'm dealing with, they are using Veritas Alta SaaS Protection for long-term retention and offline backups. This means they don't have to constrain their on-premise resources....
 

Also Known As

Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
SaaS Backup
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform vs. Veritas Alta SaaS Protection and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.