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."It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"The solution has good performance."
"The setup is really easy...I rate the support team a ten out of ten."
"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"Scaling Perimeter 81 was easy to do."
"It has provided a seamless gateway to much-needed platforms."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It keeps us all accountable and ensures secure internet connections while we all work remotely."
"It helps to quickly get access to the pages I need."
"SD-WAN is one of the primary solutions offered by Perimeter 81."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"I'd love to learn more about all of the features. Maybe a monthly spotlight of features or having a banner that explains more ways certain features could be used would be helpful."
"I would suggest adding more networking and security features that allow more customization within their platform."
"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."
"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 the future, maybe P81 can improve the network traffic balancing and redundancy."
"There is a very small amount of downtime."
"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.