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."
"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 solution is stable."
"The solution provides us with an easy way to configure and join the VPN with Perimeter 81."
"The feature that I have found to be most valuable is the reputation that the company has regarding privacy. Nowadays, this is critical, especially when you do all of your work online."
"Scaling Perimeter 81 was easy to do."
"Perimeter 81 has increased my security and privacy while maintaining solid internet performance."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"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."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"It keeps us all accountable and ensures secure internet connections while we all work remotely."
"We have an application called ADEM that helps us troubleshoot network-related issues. It helps us to isolate an issue whether it is on the ISP level, endpoint level, or system access level."
"I like it because it's very easy to use. You install the client and you have to know your gateway, but that's something we give to our users. Beyond that, it takes about three seconds to train them on how to use it. And it just works well. That's great for us because it means less administrative time."
"There are plenty of features this solution provides and the most valuable would be the complete security protection we are receiving. We are provided with similar security that the Palo Alto AWS solution has. This includes features such as a firewall and machine learning AI."
"This solution provides a DLP on the cloud and very few people have a scanning device for data at rest."
"The stacked policies, event policies, and routing policies are easy to understand for someone with general knowledge."
"The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being user-friendly."
"Overall, the cost savings, ease of deployment, and better VPN user experience and performance are valuable."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"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."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a notification sound when Perimeter81 disconnects, as I sometimes don't notice when the icon shows that it's disconnected, and I end up wasting time waiting for my browser to load a page that shows an error, usually error 404."
"One of the more negative experiences using Perimeter 81 is the fact that I am logged off after a pre-determined amount of time which cuts off access to some of my company's resources."
"The overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
"One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations."
"The solution's speed of upload and download is an area where it lacks"
"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."
"What would be useful would be a notification/warning that a session is due to timeout after exceeding the default connection limit."
"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."
"The solution needs to be more compatible with other solutions. This is specifically a problem for us when it comes to healthcare applications. They have proprietary connection types and things of that nature that make compatibility a challenge sometimes."
"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 area for improvement is for them to stay on top of keeping their CVEs on their platform up to date."
"The product's current price is an area of shortcoming where improvements are required."
"I would like to see support for custom applications."
"The frequency of updates could be reduced."
"Better integration with the MDM solution would be useful."
"The documentation is generally good, but they could provide a more detailed description of all the configuration steps. I have to search for information or call support. Palo Alto could add more knowledge base articles about configuration with screenshots and walkthroughs. That would be helpful. When configuring a product, you want to see examples of how it is done."
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.