Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Menlo Secure comparison

Check Point Software Technologies and Menlo Security are both solutions in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category. Check Point Software Technologies is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.5, while Menlo Security is ranked #29. Check Point Software Technologies holds a 2.5% mindshare in WSG, compared to Menlo Security’s 1.6% mindshare. Additionally, 97% of Check Point Software Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Menlo Security users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Menlo Secure and Check Point Harmony SASE are leading security service providers. Users indicate that Check Point Harmony SASE has the upper hand due to its extensive features and excellent customer service, despite better pricing and support from Menlo Secure.

Features: Menlo Secure offers robust web security, effective isolation policies, and competitive pricing. Check Point Harmony SASE is favored for its comprehensive integration capabilities, zero-trust access, and enhanced features suited to a broad tech ecosystem.

Room for Improvement: Menlo Secure needs better customization, improved alert management, and enhanced reporting features. Check Point Harmony SASE could benefit from streamlined reporting, better mobile support, and more intuitive user interfaces.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Menlo Secure is noted for its straightforward deployment but mixed customer service responsiveness. Check Point Harmony SASE is highly rated for both deployment and customer support, with users highlighting prompt and effective assistance.

Pricing and ROI: Menlo Secure has competitive setup costs and a good ROI in terms of security performance and operational efficiency. Check Point Harmony SASE has a higher setup cost, but users feel the ROI justifies it given its enhanced features and comprehensive services.

To learn more, read our detailed Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Menlo Secure Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Menlo Secure

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,785 peers since 2012

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

Fortinet FortiGate

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiGate is 6.2%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 2.5%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 1.6%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Fortinet FortiGate	6.2%
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)	2.5%
Menlo Secure	1.6%
Other	89.7%

Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

Featured Reviews

Vasu Gala

Manager, Information Technology Operation/Presales at TechMonarch

A stable solution with an intuitive interface and quick customer service

I have been working with Fortinet FortiGate, WatchGuard, Sophos, and SonicWall. I'm not as comfortable with SonicWall because of their UI and limitations. I prefer Fortinet above all other options. When it comes to configuration, I am confident in my ability to handle various tasks, including creating policies such as firewall rules, web policies, and application policies. Additionally, I can configure VPNs and implement load balancing, among other tasks. Overall, I feel much more comfortable working with Fortinet. Fortinet has made significant improvements by integrating AI with firewalls for threat analysis and prevention. In the past 2-3 years, they have launched FortiSASE and SIEM, and they also provide SOC services. Both Palo Alto and Fortinet FortiGate are excellent. While Fortinet FortiGate comes at higher prices, the functionality and support justify the cost. They promptly resolve firmware issues and inform all support providers about configuration changes.

Read full review

Nasseer Qureshi

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.

Read full review

Olivier DALOY

Group Information Systems Security Director - CISO at Faurecia

Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues

The solution should have no impact but it does have a bit of impact on end-users. For example, we encountered some issues in the downloads that took longer than they did without using Menlo. That is clearly not transparent for users. We expected not to have any latency when downloading anything from the internet with Menlo compared to without Menlo. We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution. In other words, we hope to get the same level of protection, while reducing the number of visible bugs, issues, latencies, impacts on performance, et cetera, that we have today with Menlo. We already solved most of them, but we still have too many such instances of issues with Menlo, even though it is protecting us for sure. The weak point of the solution is that it has consumed far too much of my team's time, taking them away from operations and projects and design. It took far too much time to implement it and get rid of all of the live issues that we encountered when our users started using the solution. The good point is that I'm sure it is protecting us and it's probably protecting us more than any other solution, which is something I appreciate a lot as a CISO. But on the other hand, the number of issues reported by the users, and the amount of time that has been necessary for either my team or the infrastructure team to spend diagnosing, troubleshooting, and fixing the issues that we had with the solution was too much. And that doesn't include the need to still use our previous solution, Blue Coat, that we have kept active so that whatever is not compatible or doesn't work with Menlo, can be handled by that other solution. It is far too demanding in terms of effort and workload and even cost, at the end of the day. That is why we decided to transition to another solution. If we had known in the beginning that we would not be able to get rid of Blue Coat, we probably would not have chosen Menlo because we were planning to replace Blue Coat with something that was at least able to do the same and more. We discovered that it was able to do more but it was not able to replace it, which is an issue. It is not only a matter of cost but is also a matter of not being able to reduce the number of partners that you have to deal with. In addition, they could enhance the ability to troubleshoot. Whenever a connection going through Menlo fails for any reason, being able to troubleshoot what the configuration of Menlo should be to allow it through would help, as would knowing what level of additional risk we would be taking with that configuration.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Fortinet FortiGate is used to prevent security failures. Since implementing the solution, we have seen improvements in security and in the distribution of our network."

"The user interface is intuitive. Anyone can configure the firewall with little knowledge of the product. The back-end is robust with good security."

"The centralized management allowed us to manage 50 devices effectively, which I found better than Cisco."

"It does a lot for you for intrusion protection and as an antivirus. The threat management bundle is worth the money. You don't need another company to monitor your web traffic for you. You can do everything yourself on the firewall. You restrict your own black list for people on the firewall. You don't need to pay some other company for another product to do that for you. The firewall can do that for you. So, it's an easy-to-use product for people to be independent. They don't need to rely on other vendors to do what the firewall can do. They can do everything."

"You can create multiple Virtual Domains (VDOMs), which are treated as separate firewall instances."

"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."

"The most valuable feature is the FortiManager for centralized management."

"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ease of use and the UI. It has always provided me with what I needed. I have no need for additional costs that other solutions have, such as Sophos."

More Fortinet FortiGate pros

"The solution has many valuable aspects, including anti-Phishing, which blocks phishing attacks in all applications (email, messaging, and social networks)."

"I rate the overall product as ten out of ten."

"HTTPS decryption is a valuable service and not always found in cloud-based secure web gateways."

"It has centralized management that allows administrators to supervise and control the security of the entire network."

"Logging back into Perimeter 81 is relatively user-friendly as I just need to re-type my Windows credentials in to access the VPN."

"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."

"Its software solution also ensures connectivity and protects against NSF filtering."

"It is a scalable solution."

More Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) pros

"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."

"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."

"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."

"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."

"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."

Cons

"I would like to see improvements in Fortinet FortiGate regarding the active-active scenario. The active-active scenario is supported but not recommended, whereas other vendors are implementing active-active without issues. Perhaps in the future, we could effectively use both firewalls to increase the throughput. If there are two boxes, they both should be able to work."

"We sometimes have issues with FortiGate's routing table in the latest firmware update. We had to downgrade the device because our customers complained about bugs."

"I believe there is room for improvement in machine learning and AI in Fortinet FortiGate. I would like to see more automation regarding AI and machine learning in Fortinet FortiGate."

"The Web-filter in this solution is not very good."

"There are too many updates coming for VPN, and the VPN keeps disconnecting frequently, which I find problematic."

"I'm not sure if it's something that they already have or are developing something, however, we need some dedicated features for container security."

"There are problems with the custom reporting of the unique traffic. The data is there, but it is too difficult for us to extract."

"Maybe they can offer a smaller scope for a cheaper price for smaller organizations."

More Fortinet FortiGate cons

"The cost is a bit expensive for most users."

"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. I'm using a Mac and we don't have that functionality."

"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."

"When it comes to firewall configuration, sometimes we encounter issues."

"Check Point Harmony SASE needs improvement as it is a very new product that lacks very basic features, and it can start working more with the customer for better implementation."

"As it is a new market solution, I still face some instabilities in access at certain times of the day when I have more than 150 users using it simultaneously."

"In mobile devices, there is also sometimes a bit of tear when it is via LTE, however, that must be due to connectivity."

More Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) cons

"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."

"Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco."

"The user monitoring could still be improved."

"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."

"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is a little bit expensive."

"The Fortinet FortiGate security features cost approximately $1,500 a year. The firewall itself doesn't have a recurring cost. It's the security features on top of that that you pay for."

"The price is really low. It's cheap in comparison to the cost of Cisco or CheckPoint, for example."

"The support subscription for the solution is annual. You are paying for support and there are two levels of support, professional and advanced."

"It's an expensive solution."

"The price for the Fortinet FortiGate is reasonable. Secure SD-WAN is free of charge. If you have their firewall, it's free of charge. It's very tempting."

"The value is the capability of having multiple services with one unique license, not having the limitation per user licensing schema, like other vendors."

"Price-wise, it's at a good price point for our market."

More Fortinet FortiGate pricing and cost advice

"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."

"Annual licenses cost $30 to $40 each."

"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."

"Overall I am very happy with the solution’s flexibility and pricing."

"Regarding pricing, I can say that the more the number of users, the less they have to pay."

"The cost of the solution's licenses depends on the particular use cases."

"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 would rate Harmony Connect's pricing at six out of ten. It wasn't particularly expensive, but it wasn't super cheap either."

More Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) pricing and cost advice

"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."

"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."

"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

869,785 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

15%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Government

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	350
Midsize Enterprise	130
Large Enterprise	187

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	53
Midsize Enterprise	18
Large Enterprise	15

No data available

Questions from the Community

Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?

When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage a...

See all answers

What is the biggest difference between Sophos XG and FortiGate?

From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know...

See all answers

What are the biggest technical differences between Sophos UTM and Fortinet FortiGate?

As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Perimeter 81?

Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Perimeter 81?

It's essential to consider the organization's specific requirements and budget. Here are some general recommendations...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Perimeter 81?

In terms of improvement, Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto....

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

People are mainly using it for zero trust web access. Menlo Secure is built from the ground up to provide zero basic ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?

Secure file sharing and data protection is not exactly what Menlo Secure is designed to do. While it can handle some ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Sophos XG vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 18% of the time

Cisco Secure Firewall vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 11% of the time

Netgate pfSense vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 9% of the time

OPNsense vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 4% of the time

Cisco Meraki MX vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 4% of the time

More Fortinet FortiGate Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)

Compared 11% of the time

Netskope vs Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)

Compared 10% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)

Compared 8% of the time

OpenVPN Access Server vs Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)

Compared 8% of the time

Cloudflare One vs Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)

Compared 3% of the time

More Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) Competitors

Prisma Access Browser vs Menlo Secure

Compared 19% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Menlo Secure

Compared 17% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs Menlo Secure

Compared 16% of the time

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs Menlo Secure

Compared 9% of the time

Silo by Authentic8 vs Menlo Secure

Compared 6% of the time

More Menlo Secure Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Fortinet FortiGate

October 2025

Download Fortinet FortiGate product report

Buyer's Guide

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)

October 2025

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) report

Download Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) product report

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure

September 2025

Download Menlo Secure product report

Also Known As

No data available

Check Point Quantum SASE

Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security

Overview

Fortinet FortiGate excels in providing integrated VPN, firewalling, and Unified Threat Management (UTM) with centralized management and high availability. It supports remote access and comprehensive threat protection, making it a preferred choice for securing networks.

Fortinet FortiGate offers a robust security platform with features such as strong intrusion prevention, application control, and web filtering. Its integration with Active Directory and SD-WAN functionality provides scalable solutions for large networks. Users appreciate its ease of use through centralized management interfaces, ensuring robust security with flexible configurations. However, FortiGate could enhance its graphical interface and technical support responsiveness, address firmware bugs and costly licensing, improve logging, integrate better with third-party tools, and strengthen scalability and memory for log storage. Complexity in configuration and the need for intuitive features are noted challenges, and there's a demand for advanced security, zero-trust capabilities, and AI integration.

What are the key features of Fortinet FortiGate?

VPN: Secure remote access and connectivity.
Firewalling: Protects networks from unauthorized access and attacks.
UTM: Offers a comprehensive approach to threat management.
SD-WAN: Optimizes traffic routing for efficient network performance.
Web Filtering: Controls and monitors web access and ensures Internet security.

What benefits or ROI should be considered?

Centralized Management: Simplifies administration and monitoring.
High Availability: Ensures consistent security and network availability.
Scalability: Adapts to the needs of growing networks.
Comprehensive Threat Protection: Provides robust security measures.
Ease of Use: Minimizes the complexity of security management.

Fortinet FortiGate is widely implemented across industries like education, finance, and government. Companies use it for firewall protection, VPN, and SD-WAN capabilities, ensuring secure perimeter and data center security. It facilitates remote access management and traffic routing optimization, offering reliable security and connectivity solutions.

Fortinet

Check Point Harmony SASE, formerly Perimeter 81, offers robust security features like split tunneling, MFA, and Zero Trust Network Access focused on secure remote access and optimized connectivity for remote teams.

Check Point Harmony SASE delivers advanced security through a user-friendly interface, efficient VPN connections, and a centralized management console. It enhances security with real-time threat intelligence from ThreatCloud and traffic management via built-in optimization. Firewall as a Service and Secure Web Gateway safeguard against unauthorized access and phishing. While users seek enhanced networking customizations and better integration with identity providers, there's an emphasis on improving reporting, real-time analytics, and policy management. Requests also include a Chrome extension, traffic balancing, and simplified configuration to address some resource-intensive aspects.

What are the key features of Check Point Harmony SASE?

Split Tunneling: Manages internet traffic more efficiently by routing only necessary data through the VPN.
MFA: Provides an additional layer of security through multi-factor authentication.
Zero Trust Network Access: Ensures secure connections by validating every user and device.
ThreatCloud: Enhances protection with real-time threat intelligence.
Firewall as a Service: Protects against unauthorized access and threats.
Secure Web Gateway: Prevents phishing attacks and unauthorized internet access.

How can organizations benefit from using Check Point Harmony SASE?

Improved Security: Real-time threat intelligence and robust authentication minimize risks.
Centralized Management: Simplifies control over network security and policies.
Optimized Connectivity: Efficient traffic routing enhances user experience.
Flexible Integration: Seamlessly integrates with existing IT infrastructure, enhancing strategic security deployment.

Check Point Harmony SASE is used across industries for secure remote access and connectivity, protecting sensitive data, and managing access to corporate resources. It is ideal for those with hybrid cloud models and requires comprehensive security measures combined with existing IT infrastructures to meet specific industry demands.

Check Point Software Technologies

Menlo Security Secure Application Access

Menlo Security Secure Application Access makes zero trust access easy, giving users secure connectivity to private applications, including web and legacy applications. At the core of Secure Application Access is the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser, which fetches, secures and delivers the content for users.

In addition to providing simple-to-deploy, clientless ZTA, Secure Application Access and the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser protect applications from attacks such as session hijacking, cookie manipulation, and other tactics that employ protocol manipulation.

Secure Application Access protects applications from Internet threats and provides granular controls for added protection of the application and associated data. These security controls include Read-only/Read-write, Upload/download, Copy/paste, AV scanning, Sandboxing, and Data Loss Prevention.

Last Mile Data Protection

Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection identifies and prevents sensitive data from leaving your company by meticulously inspecting all file uploads and user input across browsing sessions. Leveraging the Secure Cloud Browser, users are protected from the internet and you can protect your organization from data loss with comprehensive traffic monitoring and controls. This approach addresses the growing concerns surrounding data leakage in the age of AI tools like ChatGPT.

By identifying sensitive data through file types, regular expressions, or predefined libraries, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection empowers security teams to regulate data input into AI platforms and prevent unauthorized uploads. This capability provides crucial protection for intellectual property, PII, and other confidential information.

The solution leverages the Menlo Cloud Security Platform's visibility and control over traffic to reliably detect and prevent data leaks originating from both browser submission forms and non-browser traffic. With the ability to inspect encrypted web traffic, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection enforces DLP policies consistently across all users and devices, ensuring comprehensive data protection.

Menlo Security

Sample Customers

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Oracle, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Vodafone, Orange, BT Group, Telstra, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, NTT Communications, Tata Communications, SoftBank, China Mobile, Singtel, Telus, Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telkom Indonesia, Telkom South Africa, Telmex, Telia Company, Telkom Kenya

Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Menlo Secure

September 2025

Free Report: Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Menlo Secure

Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Menlo Secure and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,785 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Menlo Secure report.

See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors, best Firewalls vendors, and best ZTNA vendors.

We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.