We performed a comparison between Ivanti Connect Secure and Perimeter 81 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."
"It's quite stable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"This is a very secure and stable tool."
"Pulse Connect Secure is a stable solution."
"VPN tunneling is a very valuable feature of Pulse Connect Secure. I also like that it is straightforward to use, and you can see traffic logs on it."
"The most valuable features of Pulse Connect Secure are multi-factor authentications, and VPNs and SSL VPNs we are using."
"The best feature of Pulse Connect Secure is the good security it provides. It gives a secure connection to your network."
"The flexibility in their management is great."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful."
"Perimeter 81 is very pretty."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"The benefits are really built into the underlying protocol, however, Perimeter81 makes these available in a user-friendly way."
"Logging back into Perimeter 81 is relatively user-friendly as I just need to re-type my Windows credentials in to access the VPN."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"An area for improvement in Pulse Connect Secure is the concurrent connections, particularly needing a license if you want to use Pulse Connect Secure with your Microsoft or Windows machine."
"Pulse Connect Secure could improve the reporting, it is lacking in detail and should take the report automatically."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"At the moment, Pulse Connect Secure is a pretty good solution, and I don't see any issues with it. Currently, I'm not aware of a new or additional feature that's needed in Pulse Connect Secure, but it would be good if the team could look at how the speed of connection could be increased. Though it's quite seamless and I didn't face any problem with the speed, it would be better to improve the speed and keep going forward, especially as the industry's changing and people would love connections to be a lot faster."
"Pulse Connect Secure could improve by having better integration with NAC solutions, such as Cisco ClearPass integration with Pulse Connect Secure. Additionally, they need better integration with Microsoft Azure AD and Azure Authenticator."
"User experience and after-sales support could be better. For example, over the last couple of years, when this COVID scenario was going on, there were multiple attacks on these types of solutions. SQL has been attacked numerous times, and there were a lot of vulnerabilities, and our customers had to update and upgrade the devices every two weeks or every month. This was a headache. It could also be more scalable."
"The product could use additional dashboards."
"Connection-wise, Pulse Connect Secure could be faster, and this is its area for improvement."
"I don't know if it is technically feasible, however, if the Desktop App could be used as a Web App or a Chrome Extension it would be very nice."
"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."
"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 solution's speed of upload and download is an area where it lacks"
"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."
"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 overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
Ivanti Connect Secure is ranked 7th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 26 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 8th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 22 reviews. Ivanti Connect Secure is rated 7.8, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Ivanti Connect Secure writes "Beneficial multi-factor authentications, useful SSL VPNs, and simple initial setup". On the other hand, 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". Ivanti Connect Secure is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Ivanti Tunnel and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Tailscale. See our Ivanti Connect Secure vs. Perimeter 81 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.
