We performed a comparison between NetFoundry and Perimeter 81 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ZTNA as a Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is stable."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The Network as a Service that they offer is most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is in the cloud."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"SD-WAN is one of the primary solutions offered by Perimeter 81."
"The feature that I have found to be most valuable is the reputation that the company has regarding privacy. Nowadays, this is critical, especially when you do all of your work online."
"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"The solution could provide internet access control."
"If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good."
"There is a very small amount of downtime."
"I would suggest adding more networking and security features that allow more customization within their platform."
"The solution's speed of upload and download is an area where it lacks"
"A Google Chrome extension would be handy instead of logging into the app."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"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."
"The overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
"The platform still lacks relevant dashboards and the ability to customize them based on our needs."
NetFoundry is ranked 21st in ZTNA as a Service with 2 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 5th in ZTNA as a Service with 22 reviews. NetFoundry is rated 9.0, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of NetFoundry writes "Easy to set up, stable, and helpful for integrating the systems that require a fast and reliable connection". 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". NetFoundry is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, 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 NetFoundry vs. Perimeter 81 report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.