We performed a comparison between Aruba Remote Access Points and Check Point Remote Access VPN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"The solution has good performance."
"This solution is widely adopted and involves both technology and non-technical devices. It is robust, except in cases of significant power outages."
"Aruba works well in large spaces, especially for manufacturing. That's when you start seeing the effectiveness of Aruba."
"It’s very light."
"The product is very flexible. So far the stability of the solution has been good."
"Once configured and operational, they tend to function reliably, with few reported issues from clients or customers."
"The authentication features are valuable."
"It provides good Spectrum Analysis and troubleshooting."
"It is a very stable tool."
"For us, it was essential to integrate with Active Directory, which is our credentials repository."
"It keeps us safe when browsing the internet and when sharing confidential information with our colleagues."
"The solution has been solid for me for over five years."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"Technical support has been excellent."
"The solution offers high scalability as far as adding more users."
"The solution is easy for administrators because you can check logs and write rules on the same page."
"The biggest advantage of Check Point Remote Access VPN is that we already use the Check Point firewall. We only needed to enable the feature and do the configuration in order to enable the VPN feature. We didn't need to buy or manage new hardware. This was a big advantage."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"The security side of Aruba Remote Access Points could be improved."
"The solution's technical support has some shortcomings that need improvement."
"The solution is costly for medium-sized companies."
"Our difficulty with Aruba is that the product and the license are two different items. So, if we are adding an access point, we have to pay for two items. We have to pay to add the access point in the controller and we have to pay for the license."
"There is room for improvement in terms of pricing. If they can be more competitive."
"Its scalability capabilities should be improved."
"There are some issues, like the VLAN capabilities and support for routing between two VMs."
"The product needs an increased level of security for the end user."
"Sometimes we have some small problems with Check Point Remote Access VPN. For example, problems with authentication."
"Improved scalability would allow the solution to handle larger numbers of users and devices without a significant impact on performance."
"When you want to deploy a new Check Point agent, it is really a pain in the butt. For example, Windows 10 now has updates almost every couple of months. It changes the versioning and things under the hood. These are things that I don't understand, because I'm not a Windows person. However, I know that the Check Point client is installed on the Windows machine, and if the Check Point client's not kept up-to-date, then it's functionality breaks. It has to be up-to-date with the Windows versions. Check Point has to update the client more often. Now, the problem is that the Check Point client is not easy to update on remote computers and it's not easy to deploy a new client."
"The provisioning of VPN users has room for improvement."
"There were some issues with automation and instability."
"I cannot see the full effect of the endpoint solution because it relies on having access to the DNF queries, which might not go through the Check Point firewall when you're using it for perimeter networks. Check Point will not identify the actual source of the net queries. This may be related to the architecture, however, and not poor product issues. I don't know if it can be improved on the Check Point side or not."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN's enterprise support could be improved."
"The authentication that we handle is through a .p12 certificate, however, we have integrated it with a 2MFA service through another provider. Something that could improve Check Point is if it had its own 2MFA service through a blade or some sort of application."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Remote Access Points is ranked 13th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 13 reviews while Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 6th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 60 reviews. Aruba Remote Access Points is rated 7.8, while Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Aruba Remote Access Points writes "The solution can be used from home or any remote office to access office resources like printers and servers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". Aruba Remote Access Points is most compared with Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Fortinet FortiClient, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, OpenVPN Access Server and Zyxel VPN Client, whereas Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange. See our Aruba Remote Access Points vs. Check Point Remote Access VPN report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.
