We performed a comparison between Perimeter 81 and Safe-T Secure Application Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has good performance."
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"Perimeter 81 has increased my security and privacy while maintaining solid internet performance."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful."
"SD-WAN is one of the primary solutions offered by Perimeter 81."
"It connects quickly and stays connected. The user interface is pretty neat too. The app has in-house support with user guides that give you step-by-step walkthroughs on navigating the app. In addition, there is a live chat feature that offers prompt assistance on the go."
"Scaling Perimeter 81 was easy to do."
"the security level is very high. After we tested it and checked all the security aspects of the product, we found that it's highly secure."
"If you want a very flexible system that you can easily integrate, and develop interfaces for it or plug-ins to other application environments, it's probably the most flexible"
"Safe-T is very good for users because it has plug-in for Outlook."
"It's easy to use over the web. A user who is not in the office can use it and securely insert files."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"In the future, maybe P81 can improve the network traffic balancing and redundancy."
"If I were to be nitpicky, I would ask that Perimeter 81 offer the option for us to change the color of the graphical user interface, like maybe pink or green or so on."
"Offering in-app explanations detailing what each feature does, its benefits and potential use cases can help users better understand and utilize the tool to its full potential."
"I would suggest adding more networking and security features that allow more customization within their platform."
"The solution's speed of upload and download is an area where it lacks"
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"There is a very small amount of downtime."
"One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations."
"One important thing that we haven't found in this product is the ability to provide a read-only view for documents. Also, the ability for the customer to add annotations to these documents."
"The Outlook agent is not working well for installing it in the entire office."
Earn 20 points
Perimeter 81 is ranked 8th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 22 reviews while Safe-T Secure Application Access is ranked 44th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN. Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2, while Safe-T Secure Application Access is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of 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 Safe-T Secure Application Access writes "The architecture is open to integration and development, making the product very flexible". Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Tailscale, whereas Safe-T Secure Application Access is most compared with . See our Perimeter 81 vs. Safe-T Secure Application Access report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors, best ZTNA vendors, and best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.