IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Scytale vs Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Ranking
19th
out of 22 in ZTNA
Views
38
Comparisons
9
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
5th
out of 22 in ZTNA
Views
1,103
Comparisons
917
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Comparisons
Learn More
Overview

As enterprises adopt cloud computing and containers, they end up working with additional, platform-specific identity providers. Authenticating applications or software services across platforms requires a tremendous effort and hinders cloud or container migration efforts and development velocity. They need a flexible yet consistent solution for authenticating services, regardless of which platform they run on.

SDP – provides knowledge of who connected, from where, to what, when etc. in real-time and with far fewer resources than SEIMs require.

Offer
Learn more about Scytale
Learn more about Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter
Sample Customers
Information Not Available
ManTech International Corporation
Top Industries
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider26%
Computer Software Company26%
Government7%
Retailer7%
Company Size
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business26%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise56%

Scytale is ranked 19th in ZTNA while Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter is ranked 5th in ZTNA. Scytale is rated 0.0, while Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter is rated 0.0. On the other hand, Scytale is most compared with , whereas Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter is most compared with Appgate SDP and DeepCloud SDP.

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.