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

I think that the platform is well suited to many Remote Access VPN solutions, but I also think there is a lot of room for improvement on the backend. If you are hoping to deploy your APM solution across many different datacenters or colos, it may not be the best choice for the final solution.

Incentivized

For more suitable scenarios, it is more flexible to deploy NPA with granular access to third-party vendors and contractors. works well in hybrid and multi-cloud private application access. good use cases with DLP, logging, and zero trust. we required improvement if the customer needs full network layer access, as some of the legacy applications may need full network access. also, can we achieve better performance for latency-sensitive or real-time traffic like voice, video?

• SAML 2.0 identity federation support.
• Integrates with third-party SSO solutions.
• Bridging modern authentication and authorization (SAML, OAuth/OIDC) and classic authentication and authorization methods.
• Policy routing

Incentivized

• It enables remote users to connect the on premise or cloud hosted application.
• It overcomes the drawbacks of VPN.
• It only allows the genuine user to access the application.

• There's some more advanced configurations within OAuth that I think could be fleshed out and easier to approach.
• There's a lot of things in F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager policies that I find myself recreating every policy. An easier way to copy objects from one to policy to another.

Incentivized

• When a blocking alert pops up, the user could click to request it be enabled, making it easier to create the policy.

Incentivized

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

It is open platform so support is not good and than F5 and features visibility as not good as F5. F5 Set up and easy to use to admin console. Also have more feature visibility for load balancing, web server accelerator, application server ddos protection and WAF. F5 more efficient to handle concurrent request.

Incentivized

• Simplified our approach to company-wide VPN solutions greatly by allowing us to use a single product instead of multiple products like we had before
• Can handle 15000-20000 users at once with no issues
• Was able to configure to support users travelling with 4G connections on their laptops and accommodate constant changing IP addresses

Incentivized

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