We performed a comparison between Perimeter 81 and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks based on real Peerspot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Perimeter 81 is known for being user-friendly, having SD-WAN capabilities and helpful customer service. However, users suggest that it could improve its customization options and security capabilities. On the other hand, Prisma Access is praised for its top-notch security features, flexibility in policy application and ease of administration. Users suggest that it could improve its end-user requirements and support. Prisma Access is more expensive but is recommended for higher-end organizations, while Perimeter 81 has the potential to provide a positive ROI for its customers.
"The solution is stable."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"What I like about Harmony Connect is that every packet through the network is screened and filtered so that only clean packets can enter the PC. This is useful for a variety of security reasons because you no longer need to worry about things like DDoS attacks."
"The product’s ability to block phishing sites is valuable."
"Now that we use Harmony Connect, the files are inspected and we are sure that no malicious content is inside the company."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The reports give a simple overview of the traffic pattern within the organization."
"The Check Point portfolio showcases very strong products."
"One of the most valuable features found using Harmony is being able to monitor in a simple and orderly way."
"I find it very easy to implement and deploy in the organization."
"Being able to use the user ID or Active Directory Group is one of the great features for control and providing more flexibility without worrying about IP addresses."
"Prisma's most valuable feature would be its ability to identify bad or risky configurations."
"We're now able to go after contracts that require a Zero Trust solution and Prisma's other technology solutions."
"There is a system for monitoring the traffic. You can monitor the traffic of the connected people and point out any issues on the connection part."
"The protection for web-based applications was helpful for my colleagues who didn't want a particular application on their devices. And the non-web access protection was more for our developers because they were writing and building code on their computers. Prisma Access was able to protect them."
"You have the ability to create your own expressions for your data. Palo Alto understands that DLP is not the same for all consumers. You might have a particular need to fulfill, and they give you the opportunity to create a custom expression to match the specific format that you have. For a confidential file property that you have in your files, you can add a metadata field. It gives you that opportunity to create that."
"The remediation process is easy compared to other platforms."
"Prisma integrates well with Cortex XDR and Cortex Data Lake. My company has been also using Prisma Access in-house for nearly a year, and it integrates seamlessly."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"More report and alert options would be useful."
"Sometimes downloading PDF files can be slow."
"In order to be able to invite users, send the agent and implement it, the user input must be generated manually."
"They could improve on the available public documentation."
"In order to have to bypass the login using the website, a good feature for Perimeter 81 to have is a login instance in the Perimeter 81 application. I'm using a Mac and we don't have that functionality."
"In mobile devices, there is also sometimes a bit of tear when it is via LTE, however, that must be due to connectivity."
"While the product has been instrumental in enhancing security, continuous improvement is essential. Feedback from users and ongoing technological advancements should guide the refinement of these security measures."
"The support is not very good."
"We are using the SaaS offering. We use our applications for microservices. We use Twistlock to scan containers, and it displays these results in Prisma, which is a good feature because we can see vulnerabilities with respect to these containers. We can see everything in a very detailed manner. However, when you have different environments for a single application, such as DEV, QA, PROD, and TEST, all these environments run multiple containers, which can lead to a very high number of containers. In such a scenario, it shows you the alerts for all those containers that have vulnerabilities. If you show the results of all the containers that share the same image, it is not going to add any value. Therefore, they should narrow down the alerts based on a container. It should show information for a single container. Otherwise, the person who is looking at the results gets the impression that he has to fix all these issues. This is something that they can improve."
"The price can be reduced to make it more competitive."
"It applies commits to the firewalls slowly. There isn't an API you can use for anything. We've previously had trouble with the egress IP addresses though we expressed to engineering that those mustn't change. They changed several times without warning, causing a lot of headaches."
"The cloud setup is straightforward, and the onboarding process is much better, but the on-premises initial setup is slightly complex."
"The BGP filtering options on Prisma Access should be improved."
"Though the monitoring is fine, the solution should improve its application graphs and interface monitoring."
"The Cloud Management application has room for improvement. There are a lot of things on the roadmap for that application; things are going to happen soon."
"It wasn't so satisfying to work with it. There is room for improvement in the policy management. It is difficult to cover the entire scenery through Palo Alto products."
More Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is ranked 4th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 53 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 59 reviews. Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is rated 8.8, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) writes "Great SAML and SCIM support with the ability to deploy site-2-site tunnels with specific IP restrictions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks writes "Integration with Palo Alto platforms such as Cortex Data Lake and Autofocus gives us visibility into our attack surface". Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Cisco Umbrella, Cloudflare Access and Netskope , whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Netskope , Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client. See our Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks report.
See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors, best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors, and best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.