We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN 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."The solution has good performance."
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"Setting policies allow, block, and limit users' access."
"The security of the solution is a good feature, the stability is a valuable feature, and the customization is also a nice feature."
"The team has full visibility of the users that connect allowing them to keep control of who is in the network and what data they are allowing to come in and out."
"It keeps us safe when browsing the internet and when sharing confidential information with our colleagues."
"The biggest advantage of Check Point Remote Access VPN is that we already use the Check Point firewall. We only needed to enable the feature and do the configuration in order to enable the VPN feature. We didn't need to buy or manage new hardware."
"The VPN hides your IP address and encrypts your online traffic and it essentially ensures that your fingerprints cannot be traced on the Internet."
"It is easy to install the Endpoint Remote Access VPN client to different platforms."
"This platform has developed a reliable communication infrastructure that employees can use to communicate with remote workers."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"Perimeter 81 has increased my security and privacy while maintaining solid internet performance."
"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."
"Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful."
"The benefits are really built into the underlying protocol, however, Perimeter81 makes these available in a user-friendly way."
"It has provided a seamless gateway to much-needed platforms."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"There were some issues with automation and instability."
"The provisioning of VPN users has room for improvement."
"Improved scalability would allow the solution to handle larger numbers of users and devices without a significant impact on performance."
"In an environment with multiple cluster checkpoints, the global properties common to all clusters in some cases give problems."
"Connection of devices from various locations is efficient though there are a few challenges when there is a network failure."
"The ability to allow split-tunneling while still following our corporate policy needs to be on the table."
"For Linux machines, they don't have a full client to install. For the users that utilize Linux, there needs to be an equivalent."
"We would like to implement HTML5 (clientless access) in the product without installing any additional software."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"What would be useful would be a notification/warning that a session is due to timeout after exceeding the default connection limit."
"A Google Chrome extension would be handy instead of logging into the app."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity."
"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."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 6th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 60 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 8th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 22 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". 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". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient and Sangfor EasyConnect, whereas Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Netskope . See our Check Point Remote Access VPN 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.
