We performed a comparison between Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Sangfor SSL 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."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to join your network and provide access through the VPN."
"It's much faster and more secure than legacy solutions. It is also quite stable and scalable as well. We are able to see all the traffic in one place."
"Monitoring is the most valuable feature because we can easily monitor all kinds of stuff coming over the network. We can check the dashboard and work accordingly."
"It's very stable. Sometimes after installing the boxes, we leave them for one or two years. We would just touch the box in the case of the customer needing new requirements or changes to the setup."
"The scalability of the solution is excellent."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"Prisma helped us build a moat around our production systems. It's now impossible to log into our production from a non-MDM laptop. Prisma Access provides decent security overall."
"This solution provides a DLP on the cloud and very few people have a scanning device for data at rest."
"The most valuable feature is our ability to limit access by user, IP address, or MAC address."
"It is a stable solution...The initial setup of the product is very easy."
"The platform is easy to use."
"Sangfor SSL VPN provides secure encryption for communication."
"Sangfor SSL VPN is a secure and user-friendly solution."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"It's not really Prisma's fault, but when you try to create exceptions you don't really have those abilities. You cannot say, on the management platform, "Hey, for these users I want to create these exceptions." That is one thing that I have gotten some complaints about, and we have faced some challenges there."
"The licensing model isn't flexible enough. It's an all-or-nothing model. Other providers in the market allow you to buy modules or add-ons separately. With Prisma Access, you have to purchase the same module for all users."
"There is some particular traffic that the security team wants to filter out and apply their own policies and they cannot."
"The frequency of updates could be reduced."
"The initial support team is not very good. Most of the time, I have found that they are one to three years experienced only. They don't have network expertise. They know about Palo Alto products but don't know how to troubleshoot the issues. We have to guide them most of the time to troubleshoot correctly since their approach is not developed."
"We've run into some challenges, having hit a lot of bugs over the past year in the deployment of GlobalProtect. We've had our fair share of issues that I haven't been happy with. We're working with the support organization to remediate them and waiting for updated releases. The response on getting the bugs fixed has not been what I would consider adequate for a product like this."
"The tools' scalability is subject to some limitations when done on-premise due to the need for additional licenses. However, in other scenarios, increasing scalability involves expanding infrastructure to accommodate more third-party VPN access. It is scalable as long as you pay the money. Also, it needs to improve security."
"One thing that would help is if we could get a guide. With Cisco, for example, you can just type the problem regarding your Cisco product and you will easily get your solution. In Palo Alto, however, it's not easy to find the solutions."
"In redundancy mode, when the firewall goes off, the VPN should be able to connect to the secondary firewall automatically."
"No solution is perfect, so there is room for improvement."
"The technical support team takes around two months to respond to queries. It is very time-consuming."
"Sangfor SSL VPN should provide advanced protection against ransomware and better data analysis."
"I think Sangfor can provide a web-based SSL VPN version."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 5th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 55 reviews while Sangfor SSL VPN is ranked 16th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 5 reviews. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Sangfor SSL VPN is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks writes "Integration with Palo Alto platforms such as Cortex Data Lake and Autofocus gives us visibility into our attack surface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor SSL VPN writes "A secure and user-friendly solution that is simple to implement and configure". Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Netskope , Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler SASE, Zscaler Private Access and Prisma SD-WAN, whereas Sangfor SSL VPN is most compared with Sangfor EasyConnect, Peplink SpeedFusion, AWS Direct Connect, OpenVPN Access Server and Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. See our Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sangfor SSL 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.