Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway Reviews

A specific example of how Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway facilitates that control over browsing is that the granularity in policy control has allowed us to establish specific browsing profiles according to each position.

A specific case that has improved thanks to the solution is the reduction of incidents, and it has also reduced false positives over time with the configuration we have carried out. Therefore, the time it takes us to administer or manage events within the institution has been much lower.

The configuration in Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway involves the configuration of each of the policies, which allows us to establish very granular parameters according to each profile or each user. The malware control and DLP portion that we have also implemented in the solution is very robust.

The connection to Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway POPs is very fast because they are located within the region, and that has helped make the implementation of policies very fast.

Perhaps in file control, the maximum size of the files that can be analyzed is a negative aspect or an improvement that I consider necessary in Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway.

The initial configuration challenges included the configuration of regex for specific DLP policies, the constraints in file configuration, and tagging of applications. Those were some situations that we improved over time. At the beginning, not having too much expertise was a challenge, but today it is very simple.

Key points I recommend considering before implementing the solution include the number of users that are going to be covered by the platform, and from there, measure the use cases that can be applied in order to take maximum advantage of the platform's functionality.

I gave this review a rating of ten out of ten.

It is designed to enforce architecture governance, ensuring that SaaS traffic is fully traceable and under control. As we adopt numerous SaaS solutions, we rely on CASB functionality. CASB provides control over traffic, ensuring DLP and blocking unauthorized usage. It also helps prevent shadow IT by managing unapproved software use. The main goal is full control over employees' traffic outside the firewall as they access the SaaS ecosystem.

Netskope implements many measures and controls based on the NIST framework, offering fine-grained access control and role-based permissions. For instance, outbound traffic is managed so some users can access certain sites or SaaS platform assets while others may be restricted. For example, users might be allowed to access Google and some Google apps but not Gmail. This showcases the level of granularity Netskope provides within specific ecosystems.

It also integrates well with IAM and PAM systems, ensuring comprehensive audit trails and transaction captures for reporting and compliance. Netskope offers broad coverage for most SaaS platforms, and when a new SaaS solution is adopted, Netskope often has a solid understanding of its structure and content. This integration minimizes performance overhead, ensuring traffic flows smoothly without noticeable delays during inspections, which is another of its strengths. Netskope's relationships with SaaS providers contribute to this seamless performance.

Netskope provides vigorous policy enforcement for SaaS platforms based on how we configure it, but its vulnerability management and threat intelligence capabilities could be stronger. We rely on external sources to become aware of vulnerabilities in major SaaS platforms, which highlights a gap. It would be beneficial if Netskope offered more robust vulnerability management or integrated threat intelligence through in-house development or partnerships. This would allow for a better policy setup without needing external threat intelligence to configure Netskope. Adding these features would enhance its overall value.

I would suggest making some minor improvements to the interface to make it more intuitive, but those are primarily cosmetic. In terms of actual features, the only significant enhancement I could think of, besides better threat intelligence, would be for Netskope to assess the general SaaS landscape. This could include a scorecard showing the security posture of various SaaS platforms based on their track record with breaches and vulnerabilities. I understand this could create friction with SaaS providers if some receive poor scores, which might impact their relationship with Netskope.

If Netskope were to harness machine learning more effectively and share those models transparently with enterprise customers, this could include making traffic data they already collect available for deeper analytics, allowing customers to gain better insights into employee traffic patterns. It could also assist with network operations by helping to fine-tune performance based on traffic flow, even though the primary purpose of analyzing that data is security-related. Providing more advanced analytics using existing data could significantly enhance its value to enterprises.

I have been using Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway since 2016.

There haven't been any major issues or incidents with Netskope. While we do experience occasional slowdowns, these are infrequent and generally tolerable. Performance has been stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

Netskope scales well in performance, making it ideal for our large organization with outbound traffic. It handles high volumes of traffic, which is essential for us. Onboarding new SaaS platforms and implementing various controls is relatively straightforward.

Support is very good. There are no complaints or issues. It is adequate, and it's enterprise-grade.

Positive

We evaluated several options, including reverse proxies like Bluecoat and Zscaler, but ultimately decided on Netskope. Its features and capabilities are best aligned with our needs. Netskope provides a strong understanding of the SaaS ecosystem and granularity, which sets it apart. In contrast, Zscaler primarily focuses on routing traffic through the internet, effectively turning it into a corporate network backbone. Netskope excels in offering business intelligence related to SaaS platforms, a feature that Zscaler lacked at the time. Additionally, Zscaler’s implementation was more complex, requiring certificate installations and more upfront work than Netskope. While both solutions have their strengths, Netskope's approach and ease of implementation made it our preferred choice.

The initial setup, even though it happened some time ago when the company was still fine-tuning its operational footprint, was already better than traditional legacy enterprise solutions. Netskope provided a solid operational experience. Netskope has a strong implementation and onboarding process. They understand the rules and policies we set, can easily ingest them, and enforce them.

The initial idea was for Netskope to control outbound traffic from our employees behind the firewall. The initial deployment was on-premises. However, as our workforce has shifted to a more complex hybrid model, the Netskope deployment has also evolved. Now, we have a combination of on-prem and cloud deployments to accommodate the changing employee footprint and ensure consistent traffic control across both environments. 

We operate in a multi-cloud environment with AWS as our primary provider, but we also utilize GCP and Azure. Netskope Secure is currently only implemented in AWS. The deployment takes two to three months, a manageable timeframe compared to weeks or multi-year projects.

While the improvements are not easily quantifiable, they have significantly enhanced our security posture, regulatory compliance, and control measures and effectively eliminated shadow IT. These capabilities meet regulators' expectations, and while it's hard to provide a numeric ROI, the system would recoup its costs within about eighteen months if we pursued alternatives. It's more about improving the quality of our controls and making the process seamless rather than simply blocking access. The investment has proven worthwhile over about eighteen months to two years.

It is fairly priced.

My employees are using machine learning to optimize their decision engine. Many vendors now claim to incorporate AI into their solutions for decision-making, but at this stage, it feels more like a marketing tactic.

Netskope is a solid enterprise-grade solution that understands the challenges faced by regulated industries. I would consider it best in class. For a successful implementation, it's important to aim for a high degree of automation and ensure proper integration with your rules and policy engine. Assessing the interoperability of your existing rules engine with Netskope is key to maximizing its value.

While Netskope is a vital building block for your security posture, it's not a comprehensive cybersecurity platform. It lacks the breadth of capabilities needed for end-to-end solutions covering all NIST-recommended controls. It serves as a practical component of a larger security strategy.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We didn't have a product or resource solution earlier, and we wanted to ensure that all the policies we defend for the internet are common whether working in the office or regularly working from home. So, it should be a standard policy that applies to every user. That would be possible through Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway. It's our version of choice.

A lot of IT support overheads have gone down because the product also has a feature of ranking websites and Internet-facing applications. Earlier, we managed this with a combination of HDR and firewall. But now, through SWG, it's all automated because we are now able to define policies for a group, for a person, for a location — controls that we wanted to apply earlier to specific requirements are now possible. With Secure Web Gateway, it's only possible and quite simplified. It's a big improvement within our organization. 

There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are already relevant to any industry. So grouping the policies is the easiest part and a valuable feature. 

We also like the feature where it gets integrated with the DLP and reads the metadata passing through the DLP solution to Netskope. 

What we have done is all our lending of any request. So we have worked with three to four components on the SysysysTek. Any request that a user or a device is trying to access corporate resources, it always aligns first on the Netskope. So that way, we are also able to create all these frames for all the accesses to our data center, informing our data center.

There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. If I compare it with other products, the groups and are a little different in Netgroup. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow. So initially, when doing a pilot, at that time, it takes a lot of time to streamline the policies. So that is one thing they can work on. It should be easy to edit and easy to deploy.

The only thing is now, as part of the NexGen SWG, in the same IPU currently, the KATB and UBA portion is very limited. So maybe Netskope can extend it in future releases. That is point number one. 

Point number two, integration with any DLP solution should be very seamless, irrespective of the brand or make of the DLP. 

Netskope was also to come up with the endpoint DLP, which was expected in Q4 last year but which is still not out. So, that is the reason why we had to go with a separate DLP. If everything were available in one SKU, we would not have to search outside for the business solution. 

So maybe Netskope can work on all four mediums of DLP, which are the endpoint, the network, email, and the web. All four mediums should be covered as part of the DLP solution.

I have been using this solution for four months.  

It is quite stable. I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. We are satisfied with the level of scalability. We use 3500 endpoints for Netskope. 

We plan to further increase the use of the solution.

It was a challenge to get the architect involved. It took some time for them to put an experienced architect for a specific problem.

So, there is an area of improvement here. 

Neutral

We used a mix of our XDR solution and NetGen Firewall. We were achieving Internet access control through a combination of policies deployed in these two tools, And with Netskope coming in, now we don't need to have the same policies in the firewall and XDR.

It was very difficult to have the same controls when the user is in the office versus when the user is at home. So this is why we wanted a uniform kind of environment. So it only depends on the job business role of a user, so where they are operating from, the policy should remain the same. So we wanted that standardization.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a seven out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy. 

It is a bit difficult to deploy. There are a lot of things that need to be configured. We had challenges with the grouping of policies. 

It took us around two months to deploy the solution for around 3500 endpoints. Deploying the client in those systems was a challenge for it. 

Otherwise, if somebody works for somebody who has a very good patch deployment solution or software deployment solution, then it should not take more than two weeks.

We had a network premier partner doing the deployment for us. We also have our own PMO to handle the project. 

So that includes effort from the security team as well as the IT infrastructure team. So, all in all, through the deployment process, we had around eight or nine resources from our site. 

And three resources from the partner. There is also a success manager of Netskope involved, who often, after a few days, will come and check if everything is going smoothly or not. Overall, it was a good experience.

We followed a typical project management process where we identified short-term, mid-term, and long-term deliverables. As far as the timeline of the project goes, we have multiple locations, so we deployed the policies at location by location. 

Based on the type of users operating out of a certain location, we have created a specific policy for that location. So, location by location is the method that we approach that we do. 

Otherwise, it was the same thing as weekly reporting, weekly status reporting, monthly schedule meetings, and ending out of the intergroup challenges. 

Maintenance depends on how much the integration with other solutions like SIM and log manager, things like that. But, for my type of organization and the user base, which is, like, 3500, one or two resources should be fine.

I would rate the pricing a four out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is very expensive. It is a cheap licensing fee. 

We subscribed to one service, which was to validate the configuration done by a partner. So, the success managers keep on checking if everything is going fine or not. And it's configured properly or not, so and so forth. So we wanted a verification for the principal, so we have subscribed for this service.

We evaluated three options, like ZScaler. There were two reasons to choose Netskope. 

One reason is that the client of Netskope is very small. So it would be easier to deploy compared to other solutions. 

Second, the other solutions were quite costly for the cost we are paying for Netskope. The big license itself was very aggressive. It's very costly.  So for the money that we paid, we got a lot of additional components as part of the Netskope.

Every organization has different needs, and we created a very clear list of features that we wanted to have as a must-have in our organization. 

Netskope met all our requirements. So we went for Netskope. I would recommend using this solution. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use the solution for cloud app traffic visibility and granular control. No other solution produces results like Netskope. Our customers wanted a granular control of web and cloud app traffic. The product provides detailed cloud app traffic and web traffic controls. If we allow cloud storage for some users, we can provide granular control of up to 32. We can allow the users to edit, create, post, and delete. We can also control these activities. 

The product provides granular control for CASB policies. The product can read API JSON files, which no other products can. Using the product, the user can allow YouTube but block the ability to like, share, and subscribe. The product also has features that help users allow YouTube but block music channels. We get such requirements from our customers.

The solution's CASB, DLP, and threat protection features are very good.

The solution needs to improve its on-premise detection technique. It could also make the web traffic database very strong. The product could improve the control of web traffic.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten. My organization has acquired 75.000 users in India. Recently they have also acquired another customer base of 100,000.

The initial setup is very easy. The product is deployed on all the machines in our organization. It can also be deployed on the cloud. It can be deployed on any machine that is connected to the internet. It helps monitor and control the traffic that the users are accessing.

It is a very easy task. Downloading the configurations and setting up the solution takes around 30 seconds. It happens in real-time, and no policy or scanning happens at the endpoint level. Everything is taken care of at the cloud level.

The product is cheap. The price would be different for users purchasing Netskope Private Access.

The same client delivers Next Generation Secure Web Gateway and Netskope Private Access. Endpoint DLP, web DLP, SMTP DLP, threat protection, SWG, and Netskope Private Access can be delivered with a single lightweight agent. People looking to use the product can deliver anything, but we must be smart enough to control the policies. I have seen customers not changing the policy for years. Our customers want to see whether a user’s access is legitimate. If it's legitimate, the customers want to know the users' permissions.

Netskope has a scope of optimization and can deliver it, but the customer needs to be smart enough to follow the best practices. Netskope also provides a document for the best practices. It includes policies, how they should be, and the generic use cases that all organizations must have. By following the policies, 50% of the requirements get covered. The rest depends on each customer. Netskope provides flexibility too. Overall, I rate the product a ten out of ten.

Netskope is basically internet filtering software that protects users at all times, wherever they are, from various internet threats. I'm the general manager and we are customers and users of this solution. 

Web filtering and DLP are good features.

The solution lacks a good reporting feature. 

We've been using this solution for eight months. 

This is a stable solution. 

The product is very scalable. 

Response time is a bit slow, but the knowledge base of the customer service workers is okay. 

Positive

The initial setup is reasonably straightforward. Deployment was carried out in-house with the assistance of an external consultant. The process took around 45 days. We began by deploying it on the test users and then slowly expanding to the other departments that have a greater number of users. Two or three people were involved in the deployment and we currently have 250 users from various departments.

The ROI is in the security I'm getting for my users, which is also beneficial for me.

Netskope offers different licensing modules to different vendors. We pay an annual subscription that's an add-on module and it includes tech support. This is a costly product when compared with its competitors. The cost is above the average for a solution in this category. 

We also evaluated Zscaler and a couple of other products. We chose Netskope because of its flexibility, and ease of use. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

The tool improves organizational security and makes it more secure. 

We can connect cloud apps and monitor them. 

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway needs to integrate IoT, which can help to control devices. 

The tool works on both Mac and Windows. I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a nine out of ten. 

The solution's technical support is good. 

Positive

The tool's deployment is simple. 

The solution is a good tool from a cloud perspective. You can trust  Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway with any data you don't want to keep in your servers or on-premises devices. I rate it a nine out of ten. 

The solution has a lot of advantages over other web security products. The end user doesn't have to invest in other appliances or subscription models. While working with other vendors, the user often has to buy costly appliances and servers to manage the primary machine. 

They should work on marketing material to put out their work with a little more effort. So people get aware of the solution with a meagre cost of ownership compared to other products. They need to reach potential customers in Mexico. Whenever I approach customers regarding the solution, I notice many don't know about it. They should advertise themselves even more.

The setup was pretty straightforward. It takes a few seconds to deploy a policy; to be applied to all the users. We can use traditional ways of implementing the solution by proxy training. We can go on an agentless and then go on reverse proxy settings. We can cover all the conventional implementation scenarios like other physical client solutions.

The solution's overall cost is cheaper than regular web security solutions. The total cost of ownership is lower. With the physical appliances, you need to buy two machines and another one to manage those appliances. That's different for Netskope.

As Netskope is a cloud-based application, it is possible to analyze and distinguish personal and enterprise instances. In the case of Google Drive, we can differentiate between my personal Google Account and the enterprise Google Suite. Also, it is possible to incorporate web security within the solution.

I rate the solution as a ten for its extended capabilities within traditional web security solutions. With comprehensive capabilities within conventional web security solutions, it offers much more. It has incorporated DLP and CASB capabilities with the standard suite as well. The other vendors charge an extra price for the same.

This is purely for web filtering on the gateway level and we also use it for DLP in terms of data leakage prevention. I'm senior VP and chief information security officer and we are customers of Netskope. 

All our customers use multiple data and want to protect that by preventing data leakage and that's what it does. It also provides security against malware and malicious websites.

I think the accuracy could be improved. I'd like to see Endpoint DLP included in the solution. 

I've been using this solution for nine months. 

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

The technical support is very good. 

Positive

The solution is SaaS so the setup was smooth. We deployed in-house. 

Licensing cost is calculated by the number of users. We have 1,200 users and the annual cost is $USD 40,000. It might be pricey but it's also competitive. 

The use cases are related to the solution as a secure web gateway to access internet applications and also to provide secure internal application access.

Overall, the product is nice, and I like the URL filtering, CASB, and other security stacks like threat prevention.

It's user-friendly and more secure.

Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats.

We've been using it for the last three years or more.

The stability is fine.

It is easy to scale.

Technical support is very good, and I would give a rating of eight out of ten.

Positive

We have used Prisma Access. It has different use cases and security stacks. They provide complete customization of threats, but Netskope only provides the high level related to threats.

The initial setup is straightforward. I would give it a 4.5 out of 5. It usually takes 10 to 15 days for deployment.

The maintenance is specific, and the only rollouts are agent and traffic rollouts.

The price is average. 
Because the license is user-based, you can increase it as per the user quantity.

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is a good product, and it only takes a month to implement. It's suitable for small, medium, and large companies. I would rate it at nine on a scale from one to ten.

My clients use this solution for navigation protection.

The solution offers good security functionality.

Since they have the Netskope client, adding some functionality in the endpoint would be good.

The solution is quite stable. We've only had one problem in three years. It was quite serious, but it was short. We lost communication with one of the points of presence, but it was fixed quickly.

My clients are small, medium, and enterprise-sized businesses. The solution is very scalable.

The tech support is quite good, but it could be faster.

Positive

Depending on the company's size and architecture, deployment could take two days to a month or two, especially for more sophisticated architecture. The solution needs about three or four people during deployment. It is easy to deploy.

The solution is easy to maintain since most maintenance issues are part of Netskope's service.

The solution is expensive. It is difficult to make customers understand that they must pay that amount.

The solution is licensed monthly, but we get contracts from customers yearly. When our customers buy the solution, they receive support as well.

I would recommend Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway to others, and I rate it seven and a half out of ten. There are some limitations with security policy that could be improved to make it a little more secure, but it's still a very good solution. The solution is easy to deploy and provides good security for navigation.