No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point Harmony SASE (f...
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (7th), Firewalls (15th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (6th), ZTNA as a Service (6th), ZTNA (2nd), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (6th)
Kaspersky Security for Inte...
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
35th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (27th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (29th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Anti-Malware Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 0.9%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is 0.0%, down from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Anti-Malware Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)0.9%
Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway0.0%
Other99.1%
Anti-Malware Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Nasseer Qureshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Pre Sales Consultant at Redington Group
Delivers seamless and secure remote access while enhancing security posture
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) offers strong features, but there are areas that could be improved. One area for improvement is integration with third-party identity providers. It works with standard SAML and SSO, but we would prefer deeper integrations with solutions such as Ping for more advanced identity-based policies. Additionally, a mobile-specific client or lightweight agent would be helpful for securing access from smartphones, especially in BYOD environments. We would appreciate more granular reporting and analytics, including better drill-down capabilities to investigate specific users or app activity. The logs are comprehensive, but filtering them can sometimes feel messy. The user interface on the management portal could be more intuitive, especially when managing multiple sites or remote offices. Some of the policy configuration steps are nested and could be streamlined.
reviewer2736225 - PeerSpot reviewer
Program Manager at a hospitality company with 51-200 employees
Effective threat protection with room for cost and usability improvements
There are some drawbacks that I would mention. To be frank, enterprises always look for cost benefits, so Kaspersky could implement some price benefits. Additionally, regarding know-how, if I am an experienced person it's fine, but when someone novice is working with it, they need information about why certain actions are required. Security is a field that is very vast, and implications are not known to everyone. In future updates, a quick walk-through and know-how features would be beneficial, such as information text at relevant places. This will increase usability. Feature-wise, an impact analysis would be a really good addition.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The monitoring and granular policies are very helpful."
"It has provided a seamless gateway to much-needed platforms."
"Harmony Mobile has enabled us to provide the necessary information for the evaluation and analysis of the risks, threats, and security vulnerabilities to which mobile devices are currently exposed, as well as the technology used to address these risks."
"We were able to implement Perimeter 81 within an hour with all the required services (SSO) and infrastructure (GCP and SaaS applications)."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"The integration that this solution has with the different routers or perimeter equipment is exceptional."
"The Zero Trust and segmentation have helped my team and our customers significantly because we are able to protect every scope and allow the work-from-home users to access internal resources while passing through a threat prevention gateway, ensuring that everything is safe."
"The solution provides us with an easy way to configure and join the VPN with Perimeter 81."
"When it comes to threat detection, it is very strict with file downloads and uploads. It sends reports and quarantines suspicious files."
"The most valuable aspect for me is the user-friendly interface."
"The scalability of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is very good."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the antivirus and child protection features."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is the antivirus."
"The password thing is very good, and the overall URL protection."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and operation efficiency."
"Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway has positively impacted our organization by helping us control unwanted attacks and limiting our exposure to risks."
 

Cons

"The remote browser isolation is not part of the unified agent, as of now."
"The complex initial setup phase of the product is an area that can be improved"
"The suspend feature needs more control."
"In order to have to bypass the login using the website, a good feature for Perimeter 81 to have is a login instance in the Perimeter 81 application."
"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."
"The connectivity issue can be improved as at times it lags when connecting to their server."
"The user interface on the management portal could be more intuitive, especially when managing multiple sites or remote offices."
"Branding could be better."
"The initial setup of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is complex. The full deployment took approximately two weeks."
"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing."
"The initial setup of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is complex. The full deployment took approximately two weeks."
"The customer support of the product is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required."
"It might be helpful to have notifications on mobile devices, especially if the same browser profile is used on both mobile and laptop."
"When I do a configuration, I do not know what implication it will have downstream."
"In different locations, they're priced differently, but that's mainly marketing rather than the product features."
"I believe the absence of a procedure is the main issue."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing of Check Point is relatively high when compared to other competitors like Palo Alto and Fortinet. While Palo Alto may be on the higher side in terms of cost, Check Point's pricing is similar to that of Fortinet. In some cases, Check Point offers better value for the features it provides. We initially considered other options but ultimately decided to purchase hardware that came with three years of iOS. This approach eliminated the need for any additional costs associated with Check Point. I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"The product is neither cheap nor expensive."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"The pricing is good, especially when you compare it to other firewall or UTM solutions from FortiGate or SonicWall, where you would have to invest about four hundred thousand rupees for 100 users over a three-year period."
"The cost of the solution's licenses depends on the particular use cases."
"Perimeter 81 charges separately for gateways and VPN connectivity, but compared to Azure, it seemed more reasonable."
"Regarding pricing, I can say that the more the number of users, the less they have to pay."
"The solution's pricing model may not be suitable for smaller companies, as they might find it expensive. Larger companies tend to receive more value due to many users."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being very expensive and one being cheap. It's neither too cheap nor too expensive."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"Personal computer licenses can be expensive if you were to scale the solution extensively. However, large companies will most likely use Endpoint solutions and not this one."
"It is expensive."
"I am okay with the pricing."
"The cost is relatively high, and as a licensed product, there are restrictions on the number of users permitted per license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Anti-Malware Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
17%
Computer Software Company
17%
Pharma/Biotech Company
12%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business53
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Harmony Connect?
I am not aware of the pricing, setup cost, and licensing, but I would say the setup cost is our resource, and we have invested many hours into this project.
What needs improvement with Harmony Connect?
When I'm raising a ticket for Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81), it's a bit technical for non-technical people. It could have been clearer and easier for them to raise a ticket becau...
What is your primary use case for Harmony Connect?
I have experience with this product as a user. Currently, the Check Point product that I worked with mostly was the Firewall, the R81. I'm not working with Check Point WAF, Web Application Firewall...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?
Regarding pricing, I'll be exactly on the brink, neither for it nor against it because being a small company, it's a slightly pricey solution. However, considering the advantages they bring, we are...
What is your primary use case for Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?
We work with a cloud solution. The product that we use is developed as a SaaS model. In this case, we work with AWS as our cloud provider. We use a public cloud. The tool is good, but they need to ...
What advice do you have for others considering Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?
That's a very generic feedback. I would not have much information about threat intelligence metrics through Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway because I've not been monitoring it for quite som...
 

Also Known As

Check Point Quantum SASE
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith
Tael, Insolar, Goods.ru, Republic of Serbia
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.