CloudConnexa vs. Netskope Private Access

I think it´s a very good tool, it´s usage it´s very intuitive and the UI is very clean and responsive. When used as a remote access tool, we have it integrated with azure and the user login is done through the Microsoft account, so we have insight of the location logins centralized in Defender 365 and it´s very easy to use for the end user

Incentivized

• Proxy
• Remote Access
• DLP

Incentivized

• Publisher upgrade should be pre intimidated.
• NPA user interface can be more simplified.
• Backend changes should be notified.

We are delighted with everything they are adding and how the product is growing.

Incentivized

As I said before, I find it´s UI very intuitive and it´s very easy to use and configure, everything is where it should be and allows for a good workflow. For the end user it´s only a login page that pops out automatically and close itself once it´s authenticated so it stay out of the way of the user.

Incentivized

The support is good, but the problem is that even if you indicate that you prefer support in Spanish, the application indicates that it is available. I have never had a technician who spoke to me in Spanish.

Incentivized

The process was smooth and well managed.
There was probably good technical coordination and support.
There were only minor details that could be improved.

Incentivized

In comparison to Zscaler Private Access, Netskope Private Access provides more features and stability to the user environment. Netskope private access improves user experience in comparison to Zscaler Private Access. Cost-wise, Zscaler is cheaper than Netskope private access. Netskope Private Access works comparatively better than Zscaler Private Access in a hybrid environment.

• Re-authentication improves the security.
• Application access is more stable.
• Due to frequent publisher upgrade user unable to connect the application.