We performed a comparison between Appgate SDP and OpenVPN Access Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks, Cisco and others in ZTNA as a Service."The flexibility of the tool is valuable. It is very robust. It has a very robust configuration capability."
"It is a scalable solution...The support answers your questions very fast."
"One of the most important features is stopping lateral movement across our network."
"The interface is really friendly. It's simple to understand."
"The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort."
"It is pretty stable."
"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 best thing is that it is open source and free of cost."
"The solution is secure and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of OpenVPN is that it is open source. I can do anything with the solution, such as change, build, and collect. Additionally, it is safe to use the solution and there are frequent updates."
"OpenVPN Access Server is a simple and easy-to-use solution that I can use myself without anybody's help."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to implement."
"The product has strong encryption and scalability features. It provides security for private network connections."
"It was very easy to set up users."
"On the cloud, when you make some changes, it may be difficult."
"The user interface should be improved as it is not very easy to work with the updates."
"One limitation is that it's harder to provide access to multiple applications in the company with Appgate, but that's probably because of poor management."
"One thing that kind of sticks out to me is the ability to do a proper non-split tunnel. VPN tunnel-wise, it is not really a true unsplit tunnel, but I think that's just because of the way it's designed. A split VPN basically allows your system to talk to other systems without being forced down the tunnel. A VPN running in a non-split tunnel mode forces all the traffic down the tunnel to wherever you're VPNing to. It forces the traffic down so that the traffic is subject to the firewall and rules that you have in your corporate environment and such. It helps to prevent remote malicious folks that may be talking directly to that box from piggybacking into the corporate environment through it. They do it partially, but it would be nice to see more of an enterprise-level solution there."
"It would be better to connect to an application portal from any device. Documentation and support could be better."
"They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features to enhance remote micro connection."
"There was one annoying feature where we had to disable and enable the user. I cannot remember what it was exactly, but I think it was for a password lockout. It would be nice if there was a checkbox, or something, in the web interface to allow you to unlock a user whose password was locked."
"I'd like the solution to have more access points and more speed."
"The upgrade path from older versions was more difficult than we wanted to tackle, so we ran an older version of the software for longer than I wanted. Patching, updating, and migrating to newer versions was a problem for us. That said, we were on a rather old version that I inherited yet it worked rock solid."
"I would like to see continued advanced security implementation."
"One improvement I would like to see in OpenVPN is better adaptability in certain geographical areas."
"There are certain shortcomings in the product's stability that need improvement."
"I think right now the GUI part of it is locked out behind the pay wall. It could use something that gives it a very basic, minimal, graphic interface for logging in, for the community version. That would probably be a good step forward."
"The solution should provide a faster connection, and its security could be improved."
Appgate SDP is ranked 10th in ZTNA as a Service with 6 reviews while OpenVPN Access Server is ranked 1st in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 44 reviews. Appgate SDP is rated 8.8, while OpenVPN Access Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Appgate SDP writes "Helps us manage traffic-related issues and streamlines access management for the network ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenVPN Access Server writes "An easy-to-use tool with which its users can access networks from home or external locations". Appgate SDP is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter and Netskope Private Access, whereas OpenVPN Access Server is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Check Point Remote Access VPN and SonicWall Netextender.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service 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.