We performed a comparison between GoodAccess and Sangfor SSL VPN 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 VPN's role in facilitating remote work has improved internal efficiency."
"Access control allows us to manage permissions efficiently, ensuring secure and tailored access."
"We love the simple interface and speed and reliability of the system."
"The task of managing security and auditing for unauthorized entries has been substantially diminished."
"This simple, stable, affordable VPN solution scaled with us over the first year of use, allowing for an expansion of remote/hybrid workers to remotely access key systems otherwise restricted to our internal office network."
"GoodAccess VPN has brought a transformative shift to our organization, notably enhancing collaboration and enabling seamless remote work."
"GoodAccess simplified our infrastructure and how we interact with clients."
"Static IP Addresses with multiple gateway options per team allow us to set up different teams with different network accesses."
"Sangfor SSL VPN provides secure encryption for communication."
"The most valuable feature is our ability to limit access by user, IP address, or MAC address."
"It is a stable solution...The initial setup of the product is very easy."
"Sangfor SSL VPN is a secure and user-friendly solution."
"The platform is easy to use."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"Enhancing the user interface and experience could make it more intuitive for all users."
"They need to provide a more comprehensive app that shows more data that appears on the GoodAccess site."
"The price tier is not suited for small teams."
"It is worth mentioning that we do experience disconnects on rare occasions."
"Currently, the pricing structure is functional yet could benefit from more refined scalability calculations."
"The interface information could show more information about how threats have occurred. Right now, it only shows basic threat information."
"Adding one user at a time to the package as compared to blocks of five would be helpful. Currently, we end up with empty seats on our plans."
"This past year, I did not like having to purchase an upgrade to a plan with a minimum number of seats to get the features we needed. We do not use all of the seats."
"No solution is perfect, so there is room for improvement."
"In redundancy mode, when the firewall goes off, the VPN should be able to connect to the secondary firewall automatically."
"Sangfor SSL VPN should provide advanced protection against ransomware and better data analysis."
"The technical support team takes around two months to respond to queries. It is very time-consuming."
"I think Sangfor can provide a web-based SSL VPN version."
GoodAccess is ranked 10th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 19 reviews while Sangfor SSL VPN is ranked 16th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 5 reviews. GoodAccess is rated 9.2, while Sangfor SSL VPN is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GoodAccess writes "Robust, allows for remote work, and has comprehensive support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor SSL VPN writes "A secure and user-friendly solution that is simple to implement and configure". GoodAccess is most compared with , whereas Sangfor SSL VPN is most compared with Sangfor EasyConnect, Peplink SpeedFusion, OpenVPN Access Server, AWS Direct Connect and Symantec VIP Access Manager. See our GoodAccess vs. Sangfor SSL VPN 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.
