My main use case for Netskope is for SWG and reverse proxy.

We have used Netskope for forward proxy to protect from different malicious websites, malicious links, and malicious files so that we can secure our environment.

Netskope has positively impacted our organization by securing all our systems, and the response time is also less, with a high catch rate for any incident.

The best features that Netskope offers in my experience include SSC for secure services, CASB which helps to protect from different attacks, SWG feature, cloud firewall, SDPN which helps to create an instant connection, and remote browser isolation which isolates uncategorized and risky websites.

Compared to Checkpoint as SaaS, the catch rate of Netskope was very high and the system consumption rate such as RAM, ROM, and memory consumption for Netskope was less compared to Checkpoint SaaS. Netskope has positively impacted our organization by securing all our systems, and the response time is also less, with a high catch rate for any incident.

Netskope's pricing is very high compared to other vendors, and compared to Zscaler, Netskope has less capability.

In my last company, I have used Netskope for around one year.

We encountered some challenges during the configuration process, but the Netskope support team helped us cope with all the challenges.

Netskope is stable, but sometimes it can cause some errors.

Netskope is scalable.

The customer support experience was moderate. When asking critical questions, we did not receive responses on time, but for general queries, we received timely responses.

I would rate the customer support a six on a scale of one to ten.

Neutral

I did not use a different solution before Netskope.

The initial setup with Netskope was straightforward.

I have seen a return on investment with Netskope as we saved a lot of time by catching all the threats and thoroughly understanding the cases.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Netskope.

There was an incident where a user was attempting to access a malicious website. The user's attempt caused a download of malicious software in the system, but because of Netskope, we were able to track all the logs and block that particular malware at the network level.

I cannot give an exact rate for how quickly Netskope detects and blocks threats because that rate changes every day.

Netskope is deployed in our organization as a hybrid cloud. We are using AWS as part of our hybrid cloud setup. We purchased Netskope through channels and other vendors, not through the AWS Marketplace.

The deployment of Netskope in our environment was medium scale. Billing depends on how you are using Netskope, and according to my experience, it should be discussed with sales people. Questions regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing should be directed to higher management as I do not have visibility into these aspects.

If your company has a quite complex or normal setup, you can use Netskope as it is the best solution for catch rate and return on investment.

I rate Netskope eight out of ten because some complex issues are not diagnosed properly and responded to correctly by their support team, plus there are sometimes issues in the product.

My main use cases for Netskope are to provide a secure way for remote access and eliminating traditional VPN, and also to protect the web navigation for the users.

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.

It has better categorization and more granular features regarding web protection, as it allows me to control HTTP methods. I can publish WhatsApp web for my users as read-only, for example. Other providers cannot; they are only on and off, and do not have the granularity for a website to be read-only.

That comes with a downside, which is that they need to regularly update their controls to support those features in those websites.

In terms of improvements, the possibility to export the dashboards or the data directly to Power BI would be better. The solution has its own data, but you don't get much customization that perhaps you would be able to if you were somehow able to extract the data from an API call and load it into a Power BI dashboard.

I have been working with that tool for three years.

If I were to describe Netskope support, I would say it is above average; it is very good. It's not yet excellent, however, it's very good.

It takes some time to get help as they always try to start from the beginning. There are several steps until I get a qualified, specialized technician. Most of the time, we are fairly IT savvy, so most of the issues we can resolve for ourselves, and when we open a ticket, it's something really complicated, yet we always face level one technicians that try to accomplish the same things that we already did. In those cases, we lose time until we get level two or level three support that helps us go into the situation better.

That's a tricky question regarding the pricing of Netskope. It's quite expensive. That said, if I compare that we did with other solutions, it's somehow justified.

I don't know about Netskope providing any sort of AI features at this time. We haven't gone in that way yet, and I'm not aware. Our company's decision is that we're not going there yet. 

I would rate Netskope an eight out of ten.

I use Netskope for cloud-based security within our organization's multi-cloud environments. It helps with ease of deployment and configuration, enabling us to manage security policies and integrate them with other solutions like identity providers.

Netskope has allowed us to effectively configure security policies and manage them across our environment while providing a secure and efficient solution.

Netskope is highly effective for Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with its inbuilt DLP capabilities. It protects data in the cloud, on the web, and in emails. The threat protection capabilities are beneficial, especially in reducing the load on email traffic by preventing phishing emails and providing malware protection from advanced threats. The easy deployment and configuration of the security policies make it a valuable solution.

A bit of latency is observed in some of the applications. In future updates, I would like to see improvements in latency, as well as enhancements in advanced threat protections. Specifically, the use of AI/ML for anomaly detection and dealing with signatureless advanced threats would be beneficial.

I have been using Netskope for almost a year.

I would rate the stability of Netskope around eight out of ten.

Netskope is highly scalable and has supported our organization's growth without any challenges.

I haven't encountered any major challenges with Netskope's technical support.

I previously worked with Zscaler, but I switched to Netskope due to an organizational change.

The initial setup was smooth and easy. The installation and configuration were seamless, making it straightforward to deploy.

The implementation was a distributed deployment with teams from different regions taking part. So, I can't provide an exact number of people involved.

In terms of cost savings, the solution is effective and comes at a lower cost compared to competitors like Zscaler.

Netskope is cost-effective compared to similar solutions like Zscaler.

I have evaluated both Zscaler and Netskope, and found that both are leading solutions.

I would rate the overall solution eight out of ten. Netskope is easy to deploy, with effective proxy solutions. It plays a critical role in cloud security, especially regarding the SASE framework and zero trust principles.

My primary use case was finding a SaaS tool to bring the entire organization under a single network. I also needed features like web filtering, proxy, and protection.

Accuracy could be improved.

I have been using Netskope for six months.

The initial setup is straightforward and takes around two to three weeks. We worked altogether with operation team for deployment.

It saves 20 percent of our money.

Before, it was a lot cheaper. Now they're at a higher price.

We have connected our local network and AD also. It is moderately difficult.

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

We use Cisco Umbrella and plan to replace it with Netskope. We will start with the security model and other policies. 

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.

The solution offers granular control over uploads and downloads. Previously, we lacked monitoring and control over downloads from malicious sites, but now, with Netskope, we can block such downloads. We are currently in the testing phase of implementing DLP, specifically for personally identifiable information data. We don't want it to be uploaded to the cloud. 

I'm currently involved in integrating Netskope with SentinelOne in our organization. The goal is to consolidate our alert monitoring by setting up a virtual machine and establishing threat exchange protocols. This integration allows us to use a single console to monitor alerts from both Netskope and SentinelOne, enabling better correlation of security incidents.

I would like to see the product improved, especially in monitoring and security monitoring. It should be more effective so we can better identify cloud access and understand how users are accessing it. We need better visibility on security and cloud storage access.

The logs in Netskope are good, similar to what I had with CrowdStrike. CrowdStrike provided full log coverage, and we need the same for cloud-based solutions like Netskope. Every action should be logged, but I've noticed some gaps with Netskope.

We faced outages a couple of times. 

I haven't faced any issues with the tool's stability. 

Before moving to Netskope, we used McAfee products. This was before COVID, when our cloud usage was minimal and remote access wasn't as prevalent. We procured McAfee's CASB solution to monitor and manage shadow IT. This allowed us to track and block access to unapproved third-party clouds.

We started the POC in December 2023 and began working on the feasibility of the migration. We have reached around 65% of our implementation, with only 35% remaining.

We have very few resources involved, around five to six people from different teams, like the infrastructure team. I am part of the IT security team and manage the platform. Other teams help with access control, which the central security team takes care of.

We use Varonis to scan files and remove broken access permissions for data at rest. We also utilize Microsoft Purview to label sensitive files on our file server. Once this process is complete, we will block access through Netskope. This is our future vision, though we are currently in the implementation phase.

I'm involved in both implementing and supporting the solution. As part of the operations team, I provide knowledge transfer sessions to team members. When implementing new policies, I discuss with team members how to handle alerts and what actions to take when alerts are triggered.

Access with Cisco Umbrella is very different compared to Netskope. Some sites accessible with Cisco Umbrella are blocked by Netskope. We had to revisit each and every policy again. We exported all the configurations from Cisco Umbrella and had to review everything.

Before implementing, go with the POC and have an extended POC session. Clarify everything during the POC because it becomes very difficult to get them on a call for critical issues after the POC. Make sure all concerns are discussed and resolved before implementation.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

The solution is useful for remote workflow access.

Netskope’s CASB provides good visibility of the applications being used. We can use Shadow IT based on the traffic. DLP and CASB are valuable features. The tool provides extensive DLP features. We can create any level of policies and protect our data on-premise or cloud. The tool integrates with all the components very well.

The threat protection features must be improved. Other competitors on the market, like McAfee and Fortinet, provide threat protection features across all the modules.

I have been using the solution for two and a half years.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The tool’s scalability is good. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. The product is suitable for small and medium-sized businesses.

The support is good, but not up to the mark.

Neutral

The product is very easy to deploy. We have to install an agent on the machines through the distribution systems. It is the only dependency. Apart from that, we don't have any internal components on-premises at the user end. Everything is cloud-driven. I rate the ease of setup a ten out of ten. Netskope has its own cloud. We deploy the tool on-premises and on AWS. The product can be deployed for a user within a few minutes. It will take longer to deploy the tool for the whole organization.

The solution provides a very good return on investment. I rate the ROI a ten out of ten.

The pricing is very flexible. I rate the pricing a three out of ten.

Netskope is better than Zscaler.

We are users and partners of the solution. I will recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use the tool to control the use of our email going outside.  We use it to secure our data. We use it for data exfiltration, enforce policies for users who use both personal and corporate accounts, and ensure PCI compliance. We also use it to block malware by detecting and blocking any malware in cloud services immediately. Additionally, we monitor privileged accounts to prevent unauthorized access to our resources. We use it to protect our privileged accounts in Microsoft Azure.

The solution provides information about third-party applications registered to our corporate email address and alerts us when users enroll in other applications using their work email.

The tool helps us detect threats and provides insights. Then, we take necessary measures to ensure users have MFA enrolled and take other security steps.

We are an airline, so our users frequently move between locations. For example, a pilot might log in from one country in the morning and another within a few hours. Netskope helps us guard against threats by detecting if a data exfiltration attempt occurs from a specific location.

I have been using the product for three years. 

We didn't have any issues with Netskope's stability. 

The scalability has been good for us because we didn't have to pay for anything extra. We locked in the price for three years at a significantly reasonable rate. I can't provide more details because the person who handled it left the team, but I believe the decision was based on cost. Given the pandemic period, when many airlines faced financial difficulties due to closed borders, it had to be a very reasonable cost or a suitable payment plan. My company has 1500 users.

I have never used technical support yet. 

We use Microsoft Azure, specifically Microsoft's CASB solution, because most companies, including ours, already use Microsoft products like Microsoft 365. Since it's already part of our subscription, it made sense to evaluate it. If we're satisfied with Microsoft by next year, we might move to it since we already have a subscription.

I rate the tool's deployment ease a nine out of ten. It's a SaaS solution; the deployment process is straightforward, ensuring it's connected internally. For what I use it for daily, it's very accessible and user-friendly, with nothing complex involved.

I wasn't involved in the initial discussions about its cost. However, within the next year, by around June, I'll need to review the vendors' quotes. Typically, our procurement team handles the process by issuing an RFP to vendors to get quotes. From there, we evaluate based on pricing and may conduct a proof of concept to assess value.

My company is mid-size. In our country, having around 2500 employees places us in the midsize category. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. The tool helps monitor Microsoft Azure activities, such as operational functions and user registrations. It checks if these actions align with normal practices to ensure security. This provides insights into applications integrated into our Azure environment

For a secured web gateway in my company, everything revolves around Netskope CASB and Netskope DLP. I mostly use the tool for cloud access and to ensure a secure web gateway.

The most valuable feature of the product stems from the fact that there is a list of all Netskope POPs, which is the point of presence spread throughout the world. When you work on the backbone of the tool, you can break out, meaning you don't have to come back to your original service provider and then go to your new service provider to use the tool on the internet. If I am in the US or the UK, I can break out at that POP when using Netskope, so I don't need to come back onto my network and go back through my network again to access the product.

The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required.

Netskope is a good product. The tool has a whole new list of features that have come out now, but I have not checked them out.

The product's reporting capabilities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required.

The solution's technical support response time is an area that needs to be improved.

I have been using Netskope for seven years. I don't use the product for my customers.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. The uptime offered by the solution is around 99.99 percent.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The product is mostly used in medium to enterprise-sized organizations.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase was simple since a user basically just needs an agent to be rolled out.

The solution can be deployed very quickly. It may take you a bit of time to set up the rules, but the rollout of the product to its customers is very quick.

The solution can be deployed on the cloud.

It is an expensive solution.

The customers' budget may influence whether they would choose Palo Alto Networks, Palo Alto Networks K2-Series, or Netskope. I think Palo Alto Networks focuses on offering a bit more enterprise-oriented products, and I would probably also go with medium-sized companies since it is easier to administer than Netskope. Netskope and Palo Alto Networks offer the same functionalities, and it is all about support and implementation.

Palo Alto Networks has more integrations with other products, meaning it has a bigger integration stack with other products, which Netskope doesn't offer. With Palo Alto Networks, I can use EDR and all of its other tools, which Netskope doesn't offer. If I look at things from a consolidated view and consider my customer's requirements in terms of price and cost, then Palo Alto Networks would probably be preferable over Netskope.

It is possible to organize a secured web gateway with the use of Netskope.

In terms of the most efficient real-time data protection related to Netskope, it is possible for users to set up DLP rules in real time.

I have experience with Netskope's analytics and reporting capabilities. The product's analytics part is pretty fine.

I rate the overall product a seven and a half to eight out of ten.