We performed a comparison between Aruba Remote Access Points and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks 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 platform has the most valuable advanced filtering feature."
"I can use the solution from my home or any remote office to access printers, servers, etc."
"Aruba works well in large spaces, especially for manufacturing. That's when you start seeing the effectiveness of Aruba."
"It provides good Spectrum Analysis and troubleshooting."
"Aruba Remote Access Points provide a level of protection for our IPs."
"It’s very light."
"The authentication features are valuable."
"The product is very flexible. So far the stability of the solution has been good."
"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."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"Prisma Access provides comprehensive security. It provides URL filtering, application control, SSL, DLP, etc. It provides complete security for the cloud environment."
"It is geographically dispersed, and it sits on top of Google and AWS platforms. Therefore, you don't face the standard issues, such as latency or bandwidth issues, that you usually face in the case of on-prem data centers."
"The most valuable feature is the zero-trust part of this solution."
"The solution also provides traffic analysis, threat prevention, URL filtering, and segmentation. That combination is important because it enhances the protection and makes the traffic more secure. It also keeps things more up-to-date, enabling us to deal with more of the current threats."
"Monitoring is the most valuable feature because we can easily monitor all kinds of stuff coming over the network. We can check the dashboard and work accordingly."
"Overall, the cost savings, ease of deployment, and better VPN user experience and performance are valuable."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"There are some issues, like the VLAN capabilities and support for routing between two VMs."
"It could have better monitoring features."
"I use the controller when using Aruba Remote Access Points, particularly during configuration. Hence, room for improvement in Aruba Remote Access Points is for its web UI to be easier to control."
"The solution is costly for medium-sized companies."
"The product needs an increased level of security for the end user."
"There is room for improvement in terms of pricing. If they can be more competitive."
"It would help if the remote APs had some kind of SoHo environment with built-in firewall features. That way it could connect directly in a client-to-site type of environment, or a site-to-site VPN environment. That way users could have a complete office setup without coming to the private cloud."
"The security side of Aruba Remote Access Points could be improved."
"When we deploy firewall rules via Panorama, we find it's a little bit slow. We have a global environment and might have 100 gateways or VPNs in the cloud. When we deploy something, it tries to deploy it one-by-one, and that can be slow."
"The price can be reduced to make it more competitive."
"There can be some latency issues with the solution that should be improved."
"Its security is good. Everything is good, but the way the dashboard responds can be improved. It takes time to implement a policy. If you change only two or three lines and push the policy to make the change work, it takes 20 to 30 minutes even for a small change. That is something very irritating from the implementation perspective."
"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."
"The cloud setup is straightforward, and the onboarding process is much better, but the on-premises initial setup is slightly complex."
"One area for improvement is for them to stay on top of keeping their CVEs on their platform up to date."
"We would like to see improvements in the licensing; currently, Palo Alto provides 500 to 1000 licenses for users, and we want to see 1500 to 2000 licenses for one version."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Remote Access Points is ranked 13th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 13 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 5th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 59 reviews. Aruba Remote Access Points is rated 7.8, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Remote Access Points writes "The solution can be used from home or any remote office to access office resources like printers and servers". 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". Aruba Remote Access Points is most compared with Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Fortinet FortiClient, OpenVPN Access Server and Zyxel VPN Client, whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Netskope , Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Prisma SD-WAN. See our Aruba Remote Access Points vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.
