Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenVPN Access Server vs Safe-T Secure Application Access comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 14, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenVPN Access Server
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Safe-T Secure Application A...
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
43rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Access Management (31st), ZTNA (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Enterprise Infrastructure VPN category, the mindshare of OpenVPN Access Server is 13.3%, down from 14.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Safe-T Secure Application Access is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenVPN Access Server13.3%
Safe-T Secure Application Access0.5%
Other86.2%
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
 

Featured Reviews

Emmanuel Chebukati - PeerSpot reviewer
DevSecOps Engineer at a tech company with 51-200 employees
Secure remote access has protected diverse users while access controls provide precise permissions
The user interface of OpenVPN Access Server is good but can be improved. I would prefer to see it become more intuitive. I use Twingate as an alternative, and in Twingate, you see resources, while in OpenVPN Access Server, those would be IP addresses. You get to see dashboards and access views of who can access a particular resource or subnet. You can see who can access what resources from the user view, but you can also see the reverse, which is which resource can be accessed by what users. That reverse view would be a nice addition to have in a dashboard. Additionally, access logs associated with that resource would be helpful, so it would be beneficial to have different views for the same content. Beyond the positive aspects, I would like to see improvements in OpenVPN Access Server. Twingate offers a different approach to the same problem by moving more towards resource-specific resources and fine-grained zero-trust access, as opposed to entire subnets and entire networks. I would prefer to see views on resources. In the same way that we can define subnets, perhaps we could have views that describe what this particular subnet does and what this particular resource does. Then we can assign those resources and subnets to individual users and groups. It is more about granularizing the resources that can be accessed rather than simply bundling them under subnets or a list of subnets, which is the current approach. Apart from that, I would like to see UI enhancements in OpenVPN Access Server in the future. Making it more modern would be beneficial.
it_user787671 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network and Security Engineer
Needs to be easier to configure and to display logs more simply
We use only it for scanning files for viruses. That's the only feature we use in this product It needs to be easier to configure, it should be something that's working well with other sources. It should be something that allows me to see the logs simply. One to three years. Sometimes it doesn't…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The product’s adaptability is valuable."
"The most valuable features of OpenVPN are its ease of use, client familiarity, end-user familiarity, operating system integration, and price points."
"We use the solution to access remote services."
"It is easy to use."
"I would recommend this solution to other people."
"The initial setup phase of OpenVPN Access Server was fine, and it was easy."
"The compatibility with almost any Linux operating system, and how easy it is to write scripts and generate keys for people to use and log in. I found it easy to deploy quickly."
"The most valuable feature is that I can access my local network remotely and avoid doing all the port forwarding and redirections, and so on."
"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"
"It's easy to use over the web. A user who is not in the office can use it and securely insert files."
"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."
 

Cons

"It should automate our processes."
"The logs should be made easier to read."
"The product’s connectivity is very slow. It could be faster."
"The connections could be faster and more stable."
"One improvement I would like to see in OpenVPN is better adaptability in certain geographical areas."
"There are tasks that require logging onto the server to run commands, which is not intuitive through the UI."
"If there was a Graphical User Interface to help streamline the configuration, I believe OpenVPN would probably venture more into the non-geek realm as it were."
"Everything in OpenVPN Access Server is very good, but the price is expensive."
"The Outlook agent is not working well for installing it in the entire office."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is free, you buy support."
"One of the valuable features of OpenVPN is that it is free for a single user."
"The licensing has a fixed pricing."
"OpenVPN Access Server is a cheap corporate solution."
"OpenVPN is a free and open-source solution."
"The Pro Edition has a reasonable price per user."
"OpenVPN is an open-source solution. If the solution is used for personal use it is free. For non-personal use, the solution can be expensive."
"The product offers yearly as well as monthly subscription plans. It has moderate pricing."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions are best for your needs.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
6%
University
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business34
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise14
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Fortinet FortiClient compare with Open VPN Access Server?
Fortinet FortiClient is a feature-rich solution that is easy to use and deploy without sacrificing safety and security. It has a very fast connection rate and has a built-in VPN. With this solution...
What do you like most about OpenVPN Access Server?
OpenVPN Access Server is a simple and easy-to-use solution that I can use myself without anybody's help.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenVPN Access Server?
The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for OpenVPN Access Server is really good, not that expensive. I am easily able to add new users from the OpenVPN Access Server official websit...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

OpenVPN
Safe-T SDA, Safe-T, Safe-T Software-Defined Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Verizon, Amazon, Disney, HP, Microsoft, IBM, Samsung
Government of Israel, eviCore Healthcore, Glen Imaging, Sarin, LBG, Rollomatic, Boegli-Gravures SA, Banque Heritage, Groupe Minoteries, Temenos, ZEK, RLM Finsbury, Harel Insurance, Meitav Dash
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenVPN Access Server vs. Safe-T Secure Application Access and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.