F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs. Netskope Private Access

In the current digital world we are moving into, I would recommend F5 for all SMB to enterprise organizations. There are various models to pick from. This helps secure the environment and make the network robust to any sort of attacks. I am not able to think of any reason why one should not deploy or this device is less appropriate because nowadays every small company has application / ERPs. It is also worthwhile to note in case if all your apps are being deployed in the cloud by another service provider who provides you SAAS access, in that case, you can be at ease as securing these app falls on to the provider. However, should the budget be available I would recommend deploy this and enhancing your security.

Incentivized

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

• Source and destination IP Base policy
• Source and application base policy
• Ssl VPN with load balancing and fail over policy working fine.

Incentivized

• Proxy
• Remote Access
• DLP

Incentivized

• CCU Licenses are limited by device and are not shared between APM devices
• User sessions are not stored globally, so persistence can be an issue with users all over the world
• Configuration can get complicated when split up between multiple sites

Incentivized

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

Integration with F5 BIG-IP systems that we plan to keep using for a while.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

If F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager usability is fine it's not hard to use if you read the documentation but it does feel dated and could use a responsive design update to modernize user interface to current standards.

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

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager integrates extremely well with the rest of our F5 infrastructure which is a big plus and provides us with a familiar user interface, but it isn't as scalable in its current iteration as something like Zscaler Private Access.

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.

• Positive is that due to how much F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager can do, the F5 is the landing spot in our environment for MFA authentication.
• It has allowed a technology the company originally bought for load balancing to be used for multiple purposes.
• F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has made the environment more trusting of F5 as a MFA.

Incentivized

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