We performed a comparison between Safe-T Secure Application Access and ThreatLocker Protect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tailscale, Twingate, Perimeter 81 and others in ZTNA."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."
"It's easy to use over the web. A user who is not in the office can use it and securely insert files."
"Safe-T is very good for users because it has plug-in for Outlook."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"Application control, ring-fencing, and storage control are the most important features, followed closely by elevation."
"Feature-wise, the learning mode and the fact that it's blocking everything are the most valuable. I don't see why more companies don't use the type of product."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting has all of these features integrated into one console, making it effective."
"The biggest improvement has been knowing that something unauthorized isn't going to get installed on anyone’s machines."
"The most valuable feature is selective elevation, which allows elevating an individual process to admin privilege without granting admin privilege to that user, which has been by far the most useful feature outside of the overall solution itself."
"The great thing is that if you get a malicious email and you try to run something, ThreatLocker is not going to let it do anything. It is not going to let anything infect your network."
"The sandbox functionality is fantastic."
"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."
"If you have a thousand computers with ThreatLocker agents on them, when you approve or create a new policy saying that Adobe Reader that matches this hashtag and meets certain criteria is allowed to be installed, it applies at the top level or the organization level. It applies to every computer in the company. When you make that new policy and push it out and it goes out and updates all of the clients. Unfortunately, at this time, it does not look like they stagger the push-out."
"ThreatLocker could offer more flexible training, like online or offline classes after hours. The fact that they even provide weekly training makes it seem silly to suggest, but some people can't do it during the day, so they want to train after work. They could also start a podcast about issues they see frequently and what requires attention. A podcast would be helpful to keep us all apprised about what's going on and/or offline training for those people who can't train during the week."
"The reporting could be improved."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
"From a reporting perspective, enhancing the ability to customize reports would be beneficial."
"We identified several areas that we would like to see improved."
Earn 20 points
Safe-T Secure Application Access is ranked 20th in ZTNA while ThreatLocker Protect is ranked 9th in ZTNA with 13 reviews. Safe-T Secure Application Access is rated 7.8, while ThreatLocker Protect is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Safe-T Secure Application Access writes "The architecture is open to integration and development, making the product very flexible". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatLocker Protect writes "Integration is simple, deployment is straightforward, and extensive well-written documentation is available online". Safe-T Secure Application Access is most compared with , whereas ThreatLocker Protect is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, GravityZone Business Security and Huntress.
See our list of best ZTNA vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA 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.
