We performed a comparison between Netskope and Perimeter 81 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The solution is stable."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"Netskope's control is user-friendly and comprehensible. It also helps in conveying information effectively as a company, making it crucial for customer satisfaction."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"The solution offers a better understanding of the real scenario and identifies the cloud apps that are being utilized."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"Technical support is good. They are very helpful and quick to resolve any issues we have."
"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"The setup is really easy...I rate the support team a ten out of ten."
"It has provided a seamless gateway to much-needed platforms."
"The feature that I have found to be most valuable is the reputation that the company has regarding privacy. Nowadays, this is critical, especially when you do all of your work online."
"It helps to quickly get access to the pages I need."
"Perimeter 81 is very pretty."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It should have user behavior analysis and diverse analysis."
"The configuration and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"It needed some fine-tuning on core business sites that we used, which were sensitive to what we term a man-in-the-middle certificate by design. Some sites were not tolerant because they presented as potentially malicious. So, we just had to make some tweaks so that it would bypass or interpret it."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"The configuration in the cloud model could be improved upon."
"The dashboard performance could be much better and faster, but because it is a complicated product, it takes time for the dashboard to process."
"I have found that the log-in/out process takes quite some time."
"One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations."
"One of the more negative experiences using Perimeter 81 is the fact that I am logged off after a pre-determined amount of time which cuts off access to some of my company's resources."
"I don't know if it is technically feasible, however, if the Desktop App could be used as a Web App or a Chrome Extension it would be very nice."
"Currently, I am not able to define a different country or location, which can result in negative experiences as the tool is being recognized by websites and this can make it difficult to access them or force me to disable the program temporarily."
"Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity."
"In the future, maybe P81 can improve the network traffic balancing and redundancy."
"I'd love to learn more about all of the features. Maybe a monthly spotlight of features or having a banner that explains more ways certain features could be used would be helpful."
Netskope is ranked 4th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 35 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 6th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 22 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Perimeter 81 writes "Great SAML and SCIM support with the ability to deploy site-2-site tunnels with specific IP restrictions". Netskope is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Cisco Umbrella, whereas Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and OpenVPN Access Server. See our Netskope vs. Perimeter 81 report.
See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.