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

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
15th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (8th), Firewalls (20th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (7th), ZTNA as a Service (8th), ZTNA (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Kaspersky Security for Inte...
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
37th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (30th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (30th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Anti-Malware Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is 0.3%, up 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)1.0%
Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway0.3%
Other98.7%
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 outsourcing 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

"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"Since implementing Perimeter 81 we are seeing an increase in network performance and employee productivity."
"Review of exported and imported packages and protection and content filtering have been useful."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) has positively impacted my organization by being very easy to integrate with other technologies, and it's not impactful on the traffic, so it can do its job without being heavy on the traffic."
"The product is great as it allows users to deliver the most security value at the fastest speed."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"The solution provides us with an easy way to configure and join the VPN with Perimeter 81."
"The password thing is very good, and the overall URL protection."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is the antivirus."
"When it comes to threat detection, it is very strict with file downloads and uploads. It sends reports and quarantines suspicious files."
"Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway has positively impacted our organization by helping us control unwanted attacks and limiting our exposure to risks."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and operation efficiency."
"The most valuable aspect for me is the user-friendly interface."
"I would recommend it to others as it's easy to use."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the antivirus and child protection features."
 

Cons

"The support is not very good."
"The Point locations need to improve the latency and speed."
"There are a few areas where the solution could be improved. For instance, we sometimes encounter connectivity issues, which can be problematic. Recently, I experienced a connectivity issue while trying to move to Azure. Connectivity issues can be quite frustrating."
"Offering in-app explanations detailing what each feature does, its benefits and potential use cases can help users better understand and utilize the tool to its full potential."
"At times, when I lose connection, I feel that the equipment is slowing me down."
"The platform's pricing can be an issue for smaller companies, as the cost may be higher than for larger organizations."
"The remote browser isolation is not part of the unified agent, as of now."
"What would be useful would be a notification/warning that a session is due to timeout after exceeding the default connection limit."
"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing."
"In different locations, they're priced differently, but that's mainly marketing rather than the product features."
"It might be helpful to have notifications on mobile devices, especially if the same browser profile is used on both mobile and laptop."
"The customer support of the product is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The initial setup of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is complex. The full deployment took approximately two weeks."
"When I do a configuration, I do not know what implication it will have downstream."
"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."
"I consider the product to be a medium-priced solution. There are no additional costs attached to the tool."
"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 product is reasonably priced."
"Overall I am very happy with the solution’s flexibility and pricing."
"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."
"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 am okay with the pricing."
"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."
"The cost is relatively high, and as a licensed product, there are restrictions on the number of users permitted per license."
"It is 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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Anti-Malware Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
16%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business53
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise14
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: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.