Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) Reviews

We primarily use Perimeter 81 for VPN purposes.

The customer support was excellent. They were very helpful whenever we needed assistance. Also, the gateway they provided worked well. The availability of support programs made it easy for us to resolve any issues promptly. The solution itself was quite similar to others we have used, so the strong support was a distinguishing factor.

There are a few areas where the solution could be improved. For instance, we sometimes encounter connectivity issues, which can be problematic. Recently, I experienced a connectivity issue while trying to move to Azure. Connectivity issues can be quite frustrating.

Moreover, in the past, they may have charged differently for their services, which could have impacted the current performance or connectivity. However, I am not entirely sure about the specifics of their previous service offerings. But overall, connectivity issues are a common occurrence when using VPNs.

We've been using Perimeter 81 for almost three months now.

Scaling Perimeter 81 was easy to do. Around 20+ users were using it.

I had a moderate level of experience with the support. During the installation phase, I found it very easy and supportive. However, after that, when I faced an issue, the support person themselves became part of the problem. We went back and forth trying to resolve the issue, but unfortunately, nothing worked out, and we had to find a solution on our own. So, that's been my experience with their support.

The installation on Azure was actually quite easy. I had to provide a couple of personal details for data installations, and then I was able to set it up. 

In Azure, there were multiple instances available for the installation, which was helpful. It was a good experience, and I was able to get it up and running smoothly.

For the installation of Perimeter 81, it didn't take long at all. Setting up the backend and connecting with the users only took about ten minutes. It was a quick process, and I didn't spend more than that time on it. However, I didn't handle the filling up of all the details myself, as that part was handled by a third person.

We only had a single point of contact for the deployment. There was one person available to assist with the installation and configuration.

When it came to maintenance, we faced some connectivity issues, and whenever that happened, we contacted their support for assistance. There were some technical workarounds provided, but sometimes the response and resolution were not satisfactory, which became frustrating. Due to this, I had to get in touch with the solution team often. Eventually, I decided to move away from their service.

Perimeter 81 charges separately for gateways and VPN connectivity, but compared to Azure, it seemed more reasonable. Azure's pricing details were not as clear as Perimeter 81's. While Azure team mentioned certain areas, Perimeter 81 provided a clearer breakdown of the pricing, making it more understandable. So, I would say it was moderate in terms of cost.

Perimeter 81 offers both monthly and yearly licensing options. Users can choose whichever option they prefer based on their needs and preferences.

For those planning to use Perimeter 81, I would recommend going ahead with it. However, I suggest ensuring that there is a reliable tech support process in place. It's essential to know which person would be available for assistance so that you can connect with them anytime you face any issues. Also, it's important to avoid any support connectivity issues during usage. In my experience, they were in a good space when it came to using the solution.

Overall, I would rate the solution a six out of ten. 

I have experience with Check Point Harmony Connect and Harmony Endpoint, mainly in an enterprise setting for the cloud-based access control and firewall functionality. It is a good, easy-to-deploy solution that is ideal when it comes to managing access to enterprise resources for those working in a home office type of scenario.

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, etc.

Nowadays a lot of people are working from a home office, and Harmony Connect is an ideal solution when it comes to remote working. Let's say there is an organization of around 100-200 people — if they are working from home, they will have a strong need for enhanced firewall and UTM functionality. In this case, the organization can simply deploy Harmony Connect and the employees will have access to secure VPN connectivity.

Another point to mention is that Harmony Connect's real advantage over other solutions is that their support is excellent and they have really awesome technical staff.

The main problem with Harmony Connect is that, because it's in a new category of offerings by Check Point, there's very little marketing of the product so far, and this means that many potential users don't even know this kind of solution is available. There are also few testimonials or case studies talking about people who have used the product and fell in love with it, for example.

The second area in which they could improve is the performance of their management portal. For the end user of Harmony Connect, the performance is great and lightweight, but there is often some slowness when using the management portal as an administrator.

I have six months of experience with Harmony Connect.

Harmony Connect is very stable and its performance is good in the production environment. One of my customers has been using it for six months so far and no issues have been found.

It's a cloud offering so it scales nicely. I don't know about managing Harmony Connect beyond 1,000 users, but I'm not finding any difficulty with scaling because you just need to push the agent to the end user. I believe Check Point are using a major cloud provider such as Amazon, and I don't think scalability is an issue at all for them.

The real advantage of Harmony Connect is their support team. They are excellent, and their technical guys are really awesome. If there is any issue, you simply call them, and most of the time the issue will be resolved on the first call.

They are not very aggressive in their promotion of Harmony Connect, so you would expect that the support might be lacking but this is not the case. And when it comes to new feature requests, they are open to listening. If you can convince them to bring out a new feature, they will keep you updated and perhaps even connect you with their R&D team, no matter how small you might feel to them. Check Point's support team is truly one of the best.

Positive

Earlier, we used to deal with Symantec, but lately Symantec has not been operating well in India. It is very difficult to even get quotations for the pricing, so we don't deal with them much nowadays.

You hardly have to click more than three times and your Harmony Connect will be configured.

The implementation for about 1,000 users is not particularly difficult. It will need a system administrator for the data, managing the security features, and maintenance, but typically two or three staff members are more than enough to handle it.

The pricing is good, especially when you compare it to other firewall or UTM solutions from FortiGate or SonicWall, where you would have to invest about four hundred thousand rupees for 100 users over a three-year period. On top of that, for those solutions you would also need to pay for the expertise to manage the solution, including 24/7 monitoring and so on.

We have considered another solution called Prisma Access from Palo Alto Networks, and it may turn out that we will need that solution instead of Harmony Connect to fulfill our future ambitions, but I don't have any personal experience with it yet.

I would rate Harmony Connect a nine out of ten.

Our company operates within the intricate and highly regulated insurance market. Here, the sanctity of data is paramount and any breach could result in significant consequences for our stakeholders. 

Given the sensitive nature of our data and the frequent exchange of confidential information with our clients and partners, having a secure connection at all times is non-negotiable. 

Perimeter 81 has emerged as a linchpin in our cybersecurity strategy. Whether our employees are working from the confines of our fortified office infrastructure or accessing systems remotely, Perimeter 81 ensures that our data remains secure. 

Its robust architecture dovetails seamlessly with our existing IT infrastructure, offering us peace of mind in an environment increasingly characterized by cyber threats. 

Adopting Perimeter 81 has yielded noticeable improvements in our organization, especially in the realm of user experience. It's no secret that some cybersecurity tools can be daunting for users, especially those who aren't inherently tech-savvy. 

However, Perimeter 81’s interface is intuitive, and its setup is straightforward. This has reduced the learning curve for our employees substantially. The ease of use not only translates to quick adoption rates - it also ensures that our employees remain compliant with our cybersecurity protocols, enhancing the overall security posture of our organization.

While the entirety of Perimeter 81's suite is commendable, the quick access LAN feature stands out as a particular favorite in our organization. The ability to swiftly and securely access our local area network without cumbersome processes or technical hitches is invaluable. 

This feature not only boosts productivity by ensuring uninterrupted access to essential resources; it also buttresses our cybersecurity measures by ensuring that this access is always secure. The competitors of Perimeter 81 can learn a thing or two. 

While Perimeter 81 has proven to be an invaluable asset, there's always room for improvement. A focus on catering to non-tech users even further would be beneficial. 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. 

Moreover, integrating interactive tutorials or walkthroughs for new features in future releases could provide users with hands-on guidance, further simplifying their experience.

I've used the solution for six to 12 months.

I've never had any issues whatsoever, so the stability is very strong. 

The solution is easily scalable for both small and medium-sized organizations.

I haven't yet had to reach out to Perimeters' customer service and support. 

Neutral

No, we didn't use any similar solution before Perimeter 81.

The initial setup is very easy and straightforward, even for non-tech users.

We used a vendor team with a high level of expertise. They could help us quickly and answered all our questions. 

I wasn't personally part of the decision, however, I know that our choice was made after a thorough evaluation process comparing different competitors. 

I use Perimeter 81 primarily for VPN connections and work and home banking. Additionally, I use it for some oil and gas applications. You should also consider using it for SD-WAN solutions. In fact, SD-WAN is one of the primary solutions offered by Perimeter 81.

In order to minimize costs, you can use a zero-trust security model. We also use VPN to interconnect many branches, for example, here in Nigeria, for an operator in the oil and gas industry. We have a high frequency in our network.

For us, SD-WAN is the most valuable feature. They provide a unique advantage for banking purposes and are also different from other solutions. VPN is good for security.

One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations. We place a high priority on security and take measures to protect our data. We avoid using public cloud services and instead rely on data centers to collect data for both small and large branches.

In the next release, I would like to see more improvement in security capabilities.

I have been using Perimeter 81 for ten years. I am working with the latest version.

It is a very stable solution. It efficiently ensures security. We also use VPN to touch cloud and ensure secure information. However, for a specific company, we may need to improve security. The code is updated biweekly.

The scalability of Perimeter 81 depends on your equipment and routers. Different solutions may require different approaches. It is also a PLS to control.

The customer service was good. We needed to make some configurations, and it was the same as with other providers because it's a solution we use.

The initial setup is easy. The deployment process is different for each project, and it depends on the project's scope, such as the type of network and the kind of project. If you use IP and POS, it's different from if you don't use them.

It's possible to implement it in-house, or we can get some help. As for the technical aspects, we have six people who are required for the deployment and maintenance. We plan to increase the number of users for Permieter 81 in our company.

The system should think about how to maximize the ROI and minimize the OpEx cost for the customer. When you use a good solution, you can decrease your supply costs, increase engineering, reduce repair costs, and increase product stability. It's a win-win solution where the customer wins, and you win.

I would definitely recommend using Perimeter 81. Overall, I would rate the product a nine out of ten, but I would like to improve its security.

I am a remote developer and I use Perimeter81 as a VPN to access development and UAT servers for booking systems that service tier1 airlines. Those servers are mostly on the cloud, however, some are physical. We use AWS servers and physical servers in Dublin, Manchester, Amsterdam, Bejing, and Altlanta. We have individual team members spread out possibly 15-20 countries that need to be managed so it's important that we can be grouped and organized in a manner that allows us to authorize not just depending on our location but also our roles.

Our organization is made up of permanent and contract employees both onsite in our office worldwide and in remote individual locations across the globe. Perimeter81 allows us to develop software as a service (SaaS) collaboratively in a safe and efficient manner. We can authorize our web services not just by our team members' roles but also by our team members' locations based on the IP addresses on an individual level but also based on the group role for that member. The benefits are really built into the underlying protocol, however, Perimeter81 makes these available in a user-friendly way.

As a virtual private network, it enables us to communicate through development groups that segment our organization through the correct allocation of bandwidth and easily configured groups. 

Being able to add individuals to groups is the single most valuable feature, simple as it may seem. This combined with the underlying protocol makes for a powerful and easy-to-use feature for our organization. Adding and removing individuals is simple and easy to do which adds to the overall convenience and usability.

There is a very small amount of downtime. As a general user of the network, I'm not sure if this is down to maintenance time needed by our own network engineers who support our organization or indeed if it is up to Perimeter81 and its maintenance. What would be helpful is if this downtime was reduced. This may or may not involve some collaboration with Perimeter81 engineers and our own organization's engineers to ensure more up time, although I'm not complaining as this is very infrequent.

I've used the solution for over one year now.

The solution is highly scalable.

I don't directly deal with technical support.

Positive

Openpath was our old solution. We switched simply for better service and more uptime.

I did not handle the initial setup.

I did not handle the initial setup.

I don't know anything about the ROI - it's not my area.

Licensing is not my area.

I don't what other solutions were considered.

We are a company of around 30-50 people who have been working from home since the pandemic began. Our environment is completely cloud-based and all our computers are managed by our organization. 

We needed a solution that would help us protect users and the information that is handled in our company. This solution had to comply with characteristics such as the protection of network connections, prevention of threats such as malware and phishing, data protection, and, above all, it had to be easy to implement and manage. This is why we implemented Check Point Harmony Connect.

Check Point Harmony Connect helped us create a more secure environment in our organization, since our users can be safer when browsing and not being attacked by malicious actors who try to affect them with phishing or malware. On the other hand, administrators have more visibility of the sites to which users navigate and be able to control them, they can also access audit reports that allow them to make better decisions on security rules that must be applied. The protection of data in our company is the most important.

The characteristics that I have liked the most are the ease of implementation and administration. It is a cloud-based service it can be configured easily and very quickly and the administration center is very friendly for administrator users who do not know or have used the product. 

In addition, it is a cloud-based service that helps prevent cyber attacks by ensuring internet access for our users who work remotely, facilitating access control. 

Another valuable feature is that company information is kept protected by internet access control, applications to be managed, and URL filtering protection.

Sometimes downloading PDF files can be slow. It may take a while to scan the downloaded files. On some computers, the Check Point Harmony Connect agent can be a bit heavy to run in terms of CPU and Memory resources. 

Transparency to end-users could be improved. 

More compatible applications can be included. 

The support provided could be improved for when problems arise that require support from the Check Point team. Check Point is an expensive product so support should be more adequate. 

Some EDR features may still be under development and may need more time to be ready for use on a larger scale.

I've used the solution for one year.

Stability is 90% good. File scanning and web console stability could be improved.

The scalability is good.

Support is good, however, in some cases, they could improve the response time.

Neutral

I have not used any other option before.

The initial configuration was very easy to perform; the installation on the endpoints was very simple for the users.

The initial setup was handled by an internal team with supervision or support from the provider.

There have been savings related to the number of hours of implementation and administration.

I recommend that you evaluate using Check Point Harmony Connect, since, although its price may be a little more expensive, it is a solution that adds advanced security to the organization.

I only evaluated Microsoft and evaluated if Fortinet had any product that met the requirements.

We are using the product to secure roaming users who work outside the office as well for protecting a variety of company locations. 

It is great that Check Point continues to be a visionary in the network security market and delivers such anticipated products which allow users to cope with ongoing security challenges and trends.

It is used to protect offices and retail stores and it is a step forward from the traditional connectivity architecture which lacks flexibility and prevents business to advance at the desired pace.

It is great from an operational point of view. There is no need to procure and install HW; a new location could be secured almost instantly.

There is no need to talk about security. It comes from a team of talented developers and has a historic record. The Check Point portfolio showcases very strong products. 

The support from Check Point's side is great as it always and allows you to understand the product, produce and secure design as well as deploy and test it. Furthermore, the product owners are actively looking for feedback. This allows you to express your opinion and shape the product to improve it according to your needs.

The product is great as it allows users to deliver the most security value at the fastest speed. It reduces an operational load in terms of provision, installation, management, patching, and hardware replacement by increasing uptime and reducing the time to deliver to market. It also provides cloud-native availability and allows you not to bother with the sizing and location capacity as long as you stick with Harmony Connect. The price is reasonable.

Last but not least, there is an option to manage Harmony Connect from the centralized management station which allows users to apply existing policies while having a single pane of glass for network security.

An improvement could be made in terms of achieving better coverage in such complicated regions as the Asia Pacific, China, and Russia. Some PoP locations might create complicated traffic flows and impact the latency and load on network infrastructure even further.

Advanced details of log information are missing. However, the Check Point team is definitely open to constructive advice and is happy to make any requested changes.

There are still some limitations that exist while using centralized management with Harmony Connect.

I've used the solution for six months.

In order to connect to our applications like our own GitLab solution or our logs tracking system, we need to connect using the Perimeter 81 application. Before that, we needed to have installed the Amazon Workspaces solution and joined it to that one, so every developer or person who needed access to Gitlab. With Perimeter81, each user that needs Gitlab or logs access has a user created. 

The maintenance of this solution is easier and we also decrease the problems related to workspace scenarios

In the past, we needed to use Amazon workspaces in order to connect to the 'VPN', and, after that, we were able to have access to our private Gitlab solution and logs. 

This was a mess as each developer or person who needed access to Gitlab needed a Workspace created for that use - even if only you needed to access it just for one day and did not use it anymore. Even in these cases, we needed someone from the infrastructure team to create that particular workspace. With Perimeter 81, we only need to create a user and install the Perimeter81 application on the computer.

The solution provides us with:

- An easy way to configure and join the VPN with Perimeter 81. Previously, we were using Amazon workspaces and it took too much time in order to configure the workspace properly in order to just access our Gitlab repository or our logs for just one or two times of use.

- An easy way to find connection problems. You can easily contact Perimeter 81 or check https://status.perimeter81.com to see if some incidents are related to the issue that you have.

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. I'm using a Mac and we don't have that functionality. On the other hand, in order to connect with an application, we could have the opportunity to use a Google Chrome application/extension. That will make it easy to use and we can skip situations related to admin permissions in order to install the application on some laptops and computers. 

I've used the solution for six to seven months.