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

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
5th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
7th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th)
Check Point Harmony SASE (f...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
7th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
5th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (16th), Anti-Malware Tools (7th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (7th), ZTNA (2nd)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
4th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
2nd
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.3%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 5.2%, up from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 11.8%, down from 17.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks11.8%
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)5.2%
iboss2.3%
Other80.7%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
Nasseer Qureshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Pre Sales Consultant at Redington Group
Delivers seamless and secure remote access while enhancing security posture
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) offers strong features, but there are areas that could be improved. One area for improvement is integration with third-party identity providers. It works with standard SAML and SSO, but we would prefer deeper integrations with solutions such as Ping for more advanced identity-based policies. Additionally, a mobile-specific client or lightweight agent would be helpful for securing access from smartphones, especially in BYOD environments. We would appreciate more granular reporting and analytics, including better drill-down capabilities to investigate specific users or app activity. The logs are comprehensive, but filtering them can sometimes feel messy. The user interface on the management portal could be more intuitive, especially when managing multiple sites or remote offices. Some of the policy configuration steps are nested and could be streamlined.
IgorPinter - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at PULSEC
Zero-trust access has improved remote security and now simplifies cloud-based firewall management
Regarding the integration part for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, the integration with identity providers is pretty much good. It is basically firewall as a service, so it performs well. I completed the integration without any issues. What Palo Alto Networks can do better for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is probably to have the point of presence available in more locations. The point of presence from the Serbia region has the nearest POP in Frankfurt, which is an issue since it is your gateway—when you start browsing the internet, you go through a commercial connection in Germany. They definitely need to spread the service in other countries.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"SD-WAN is one of the primary solutions offered by Perimeter 81."
"The reports give a simple overview of the traffic pattern within the organization."
"Logging back into Perimeter 81 is relatively user-friendly as I just need to re-type my Windows credentials in to access the VPN."
"The tool is easy to use and set up."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"The Zero Trust and segmentation have helped my team and our customers significantly because we are able to protect every scope and allow the work-from-home users to access internal resources while passing through a threat prevention gateway, ensuring that everything is safe."
"Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) has positively impacted my organization by being very easy to integrate with other technologies, and it's not impactful on the traffic, so it can do its job without being heavy on the traffic."
"Harmony SASE helps us to manage compliance by regulating the amount of access to each department and user. We control the relevant apps and websites, which can be accessed from company-owned devices. Harmony SASE uses its own threat intelligence data from the cloud for threat prevention, and detect and manage threats with their own threat intelligence data and SASE firewall features."
"There is a system for monitoring the traffic. You can monitor the traffic of the connected people and point out any issues on the connection part."
"The stacked policies, event policies, and routing policies are easy to understand for someone with general knowledge."
"It protects all app traffic so that users can gain access to all apps. Unlike other solutions that only work from ports 80 and 443, which are predominantly for web traffic, Prisma Access covers all protocols and works on all traffic patterns... The most sophisticated attacks can arise from sources that are not behind 80/443."
"We have an application called ADEM that helps us troubleshoot network-related issues. It helps us to isolate an issue whether it is on the ISP level, endpoint level, or system access level."
"Its hands-off security and the fact that we don't have to maintain it are the most valuable features."
"To quarantine and clean a malware file provides a lot of security."
"There are plenty of features this solution provides and the most valuable would be the complete security protection we are receiving. We are provided with similar security that the Palo Alto AWS solution has. This includes features such as a firewall and machine learning AI."
"The most valuable feature is the zero-trust part of this solution."
 

Cons

"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."
"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"In the future, maybe P81 can improve the network traffic balancing and redundancy."
"Automation and scalability are areas where the solution lacks and needs to improve."
"A Google Chrome extension would be handy instead of logging into the app."
"Support is one of the points of improvement."
"Offering in-app explanations detailing what each feature does, its benefits and potential use cases can help users better understand and utilize the tool to its full potential."
"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."
"Providing USB control in a Linux environment will give more control over data security."
"More report and alert options would be useful."
"It's not really Prisma's fault, but when you try to create exceptions you don't really have those abilities. You cannot say, on the management platform, "Hey, for these users I want to create these exceptions." That is one thing that I have gotten some complaints about, and we have faced some challenges there."
"There is some particular traffic that the security team wants to filter out and apply their own policies and they cannot."
"The Prisma Access could improve in terms of adding more machine learning and AI capabilities to automate tasks such as incident response."
"The BGP filtering options on Prisma Access should be improved."
"One thing that would help is if we could get a guide. With Cisco, for example, you can just type the problem regarding your Cisco product and you will easily get your solution. In Palo Alto, however, it's not easy to find the solutions."
"The licensing model isn't flexible enough. It's an all-or-nothing model. Other providers in the market allow you to buy modules or add-ons separately. With Prisma Access, you have to purchase the same module for all users."
"When it comes to integration mechanisms, Prisma SaaS does not support reverse proxy type of integrations."
"GlobalProtect can face challenges with latency, especially when remote workers connect to centralized locations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"Annual licenses cost $30 to $40 each."
"Perimeter 81 charges separately for gateways and VPN connectivity, but compared to Azure, it seemed more reasonable."
"The solution is priced appropriately considering its uses. For an essential license, a user pays only 30 USD per month. For an enterprise version, the prices can be negotiated with the company."
"Regarding pricing, I can say that the more the number of users, the less they have to pay."
"The pricing of Check Point is relatively high when compared to other competitors like Palo Alto and Fortinet. While Palo Alto may be on the higher side in terms of cost, Check Point's pricing is similar to that of Fortinet. In some cases, Check Point offers better value for the features it provides. We initially considered other options but ultimately decided to purchase hardware that came with three years of iOS. This approach eliminated the need for any additional costs associated with Check Point. I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"I consider the product to be a medium-priced solution. There are no additional costs attached to the tool."
"The pricing is good, especially when you compare it to other firewall or UTM solutions from FortiGate or SonicWall, where you would have to invest about four hundred thousand rupees for 100 users over a three-year period."
"The solution's pricing model may not be suitable for smaller companies, as they might find it expensive. Larger companies tend to receive more value due to many users."
"There's no reason not to buy the enterprise version that gives you unlimited PoPs, but you must understand the limitations you impose on yourself if you do that. If you go crazy, that allowlist will be too big for Kubernetes clusters."
"The solution is expensive."
"This is not an expensive product and everything is included with one license."
"It is not cheap. It is expensive. The good thing is that you are able to pay for what you need, but overall, it is not cheap. The pricing is not based on packages. You pay based on the features. If you want DLP, you only pay for DLP. They are very flexible. It is not cheap, but the licensing is flexible. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Compared to other products, the price is slightly high."
"They price their products using credit modules."
"I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing."
"Based on what I have heard from others, it is a pricey solution as compared to its peers, but I am not sure. However, considering the features that it offers, it is a break-even point. You get whatever they are promising."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
884,012 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business53
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
What do you like most about Harmony Connect?
The product's initial setup phase is very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Harmony Connect?
I am not aware of the pricing, setup cost, and licensing, but I would say the setup cost is our resource, and we have...
What needs improvement with Harmony Connect?
When I'm raising a ticket for Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81), it's a bit technical for non-technica...
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What do you like most about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
From my experience, Palo Alto is more expensive compared to solutions like Netskope and Triscale.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Check Point Quantum SASE
Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Prisma Access, GlobalProtect, Palo Alto GlobalProtect Mobile Security Manager, Prisma SaaS by Palo Alto Networks, Prisma Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith
Concord Hospital, State of Colorado, Essilor International, RheinLand Versicherungsgruppe, University of Westminster, Universidade Nove de Julho, SPAR Austria, CAME Group, ZipRealty, Greenhill & Co., IKT Agder, Aviva Stadium, Animal Logic, Management & Training Corporation, Brigham Young University Hawaii, School District of Chilliwack
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,012 professionals have used our research since 2012.