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 most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"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 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 setup is really easy...I rate the support team a ten out of ten."
"The solution provides us with an easy way to configure and join the VPN with Perimeter 81."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"Logging back into Perimeter 81 is relatively user-friendly as I just need to re-type my Windows credentials in to access the VPN."
"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."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"Perimeter 81 is very pretty."
"The solution improved the consistency of our security controls and the BCP. There has been a 20 percent reduction in TCO. Prisma Access also enabled us to deliver better applications by centralizing security management."
"Security is absolutely spot-on, really top-notch. It's the result of all the components that come together, such as the HIP [Host Information Profile] and components like Forcepoint, providing end-user content inspection, and antivirus. It incorporates DLP features and that's fantastic because Prisma Access makes sure that all of the essential prerequisites are in place before a user can log in or can be tunneled into."
"Panorama provides centralized management capabilities for all our firewalls and locations so that we can manage different data centers through a single device, a very valuable feature. We don't have to log into various devices to oversee them individually."
"Prisma Access provides comprehensive security. It provides URL filtering, application control, SSL, DLP, etc. It provides complete security for the cloud environment."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to join your network and provide access through the VPN."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to change the gateway. For example, if there's a problem with a specific region or vendor, we can make modifications. The solution is scalable, and there are different gateways that can be created depending on the demand."
"The tool's consolidation is pretty quick."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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"
"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."
"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."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"The overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
"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."
"The platform still lacks relevant dashboards and the ability to customize them based on our needs."
"Currently, I am not able to define a different country or location, which can result in negative experiences as the tool is being recognized by websites and this can make it difficult to access them or force me to disable the program temporarily."
"What would be useful would be a notification/warning that a session is due to timeout after exceeding the default connection limit."
"There is a very small amount of downtime."
"Dependencies of applications sometimes is a bit confusing."
"I would like to see better pricing and an easier logging process. Also, if there was a way to log a global log, everything could go onto the system. It would be better if there was a third log, otherwise one would have to do everything manually."
"The frequency of updates could be reduced."
"Prisma would be a stronger solution if it could aggregate resources by project or by application. So say we have an application we've developed in AWS and five applications we've developed in Azure. The platform will group it according to those applications, but it's based on the tags we use in Azure, which means I have to rely on development teams to tag resources properly."
"One thing that would help is if we could get a guide. With Cisco, for example, you can just type the problem regarding your Cisco product and you will easily get your solution. In Palo Alto, however, it's not easy to find the solutions."
"Palo Alto Prisma 10 came out over a year ago. Palo Alto added this identity management feature. The legacy way Palo Alto selected which user is sitting on an IP address it passes through has been clunky."
"One area for improvement is for them to stay on top of keeping their CVEs on their platform up to date."
"I would like the solution to support a different type of authentication. We can't configure a secondary method for our portal."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Perimeter 81 is ranked 6th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 22 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 58 reviews. Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. 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 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". Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Cloudflare Access, Tailscale and Netgate pfSense, whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Netskope , Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Prisma SD-WAN. See our 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.