We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and Safe-T Secure Application Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenVPN, Fortinet, Cisco and others in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN."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."
"For a basic setup, implementation is quite easy."
"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. This was a big advantage."
"The security of the solution is a good feature, the stability is a valuable feature, and the customization is also a nice feature."
"It can improve an organization by providing secure access to resources for traveling employees, which can help to reduce the risk of data breaches or other security incidents."
"Access is browser-based only and requires no additional client installation."
"The secure hotspot access for enabling good network connectivity is great."
"It is easy to install the Endpoint Remote Access VPN client to different platforms."
"It's easy to use over the web. A user who is not in the office can use it and securely insert files."
"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"
"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."
"Safe-T is very good for users because it has plug-in for Outlook."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"When you want to deploy a new Check Point agent, it is really a pain in the butt. For example, Windows 10 now has updates almost every couple of months. It changes the versioning and things under the hood. These are things that I don't understand, because I'm not a Windows person. However, I know that the Check Point client is installed on the Windows machine, and if the Check Point client's not kept up-to-date, then it's functionality breaks. It has to be up-to-date with the Windows versions. Check Point has to update the client more often. Now, the problem is that the Check Point client is not easy to update on remote computers and it's not easy to deploy a new client."
"They could add more features, like the security to block off the doors, or create another hatch, something like this. They could make the features safer, add malware to make my mail and the Kryon system safer and to protect data at an earlier stage."
"I cannot see the full effect of the endpoint solution because it relies on having access to the DNF queries, which might not go through the Check Point firewall when you're using it for perimeter networks. Check Point will not identify the actual source of the net queries. This may be related to the architecture, however, and not poor product issues. I don't know if it can be improved on the Check Point side or not."
"We are very happy with the Windows client. You log in with the VPN for the full client, you do the log in there. But for Linux machines, they don't have a full client to install. It is important because we have some users that use Linux and they don't have a specific application from Check Point to use. That is something that could be improved."
"The Linux version may have an app (similar to Windows) instead of a shell script."
"Improvements for Check Point Remote Access VPN could include enhancing mobile connectivity for a smoother user experience."
"You have no ability to reserve a total number of licenses. The VPN user licenses are assigned per gateway, and if you enable MEP function is not so easy to size the gateway licenses."
"The interface itself needs improvement. When you need to create something, you have to go through a lot of steps. It needs to be simplified."
"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."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 6th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 60 reviews while Safe-T Secure Application Access is ranked 44th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while Safe-T Secure Application Access is rated 7.8. 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 Safe-T Secure Application Access writes "The architecture is open to integration and development, making the product very flexible". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas Safe-T Secure Application Access is most compared with .
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.