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

Portnox vs Safe-T Secure Application Access comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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

Portnox
Ranking in ZTNA
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (5th), Passwordless Authentication (1st)
Safe-T Secure Application A...
Ranking in ZTNA
20th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (31st), Access Management (35th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Portnox is 3.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Safe-T Secure Application Access is 1.9%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Portnox3.2%
Safe-T Secure Application Access1.9%
Other94.9%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

Maurice Mwaura - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Manager at Applied Principles Limited
Unified access control has improved compliance visibility and simplified passwordless access
There is work to be done when it comes to making the solution more seamless. For example, when a user is denied access, they would need a way to maybe self-resolve themselves, perhaps a way to generate a ticket on their own, something around resolutions. When it comes to users using the product, that is where good products are differentiated from products that are a bit of a challenge. Portnox has much to do in terms of their reporting. The generated reports need improvement. Things that other tools would say are normal are usually not present. For example, there is a page called NAS devices or NAS network that is able to show the switches that have been managed. Currently, there is no way of generating an easy report or an easy way of just generating something to tell the customer what they have been able to achieve so far. This is not done yet and is still very manual. I think there is work to be done there. More integrations around the various products being used would be beneficial. So far I have not encountered any major challenge. Where there was a challenge, I think support came in and helped us resolve. In fact, most of the challenges are not with the product; they are with the customer environment. I think that is just to update their documentation where they have come across a new vendor for easier integrations in the future.
it_user787671 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network and Security Engineer
Needs to be easier to configure and to display logs more simply
We use only it for scanning files for viruses. That's the only feature we use in this product It needs to be easier to configure, it should be something that's working well with other sources. It should be something that allows me to see the logs simply. One to three years. Sometimes it doesn't…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's a stable product."
"Portnox is better than other solutions that I tried before, at least with Cisco, because it has lots of features that are not included in Cisco, so it is the best for me."
"The solution has a valuable reporting feature."
"We are very satisfied with this solution; we like it because it is agentless."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"I'd recommend others to use it; it's easier to use and has this GUI that can give you more visibility to all you are doing on the device, and also it gives you a more analytic view of the people that are trying to connect."
"Portnox provides excellent security by following Zero Trust security principles."
"Previous to the deployment we didn't have complete visibility of all the endpoints, all the devices that are connected to the network, but with the deployment of portnox, we could see all the devices and where they're connecting, and we can equally segregate and apply different rules and policies to each location that we didn't monitor specifically."
"Safe-T is very good for users because it has a plug-in for Outlook."
"the security level is very high. After we tested it and checked all the security aspects of the product, we found that it's highly secure."
"At the end of the day it's really good and really improved."
"From a technical point of view, products are stable and scalable, and we do appreciate the personal touch the sales engineers (SE) support and development bring, as well as the personal touch of the sales support, the free online, and web-based training."
"We use only it for scanning files for viruses."
"If you need a solution for sending big files to customers or for receiving large files from them, this is a very good solution."
"Safe-T SDA has allowed my organization to secure my office applications and makes it harder for hackers to be able to hack into my internal office web applications."
"This product allows us to actually send it straight from our email to the other person's email in a safe way, where we can meet all our regulations and still keep the data in our control."
 

Cons

"There is room for improvement regarding Portnox's pricing strategies."
"While Portnox has been very effective overall, there are a few areas where it could be improved."
"There is work to be done when it comes to making the solution more seamless."
"I believe there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of integration."
"I believe there are some difficulties with the removal of devices that could be improved."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."
"One area for improvement would be deeper reporting and analytics capabilities for Portnox, particularly for long-term trend analysis and compliance reporting."
"The cloud solution is not that great especially with Swiss customers."
"The Outlook agent is not working well for installing it in the entire office."
"When we have something that we want improved, it takes a little bit of time until it can be fixed."
"Better UI. A better UI for the people that manage all the processes of Safe-T. Some of the UI is not as intuitive as you would like it to be."
"One important thing that we haven't found in this product is the ability to provide a read-only view for documents. Also, the ability for the customer to add annotations to these documents."
"In terms of improvement, they need to be much more strict regarding the roadmap, about timelines and when new features will be up in production."
"I'm not sure what advice I would give others about this product because I don't like Safe-T."
"Setting up Safe-T SDE is very complex. It is not straightforward, and it requires much understanding on the concepts of the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"The solution is very expensive and I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"The vendor price is fair."
"It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle."
"The cost of Portnox Clear is reasonable."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"The licensing module should be reviewed to count the number of devices instead of port numbers of total switches. There is a case for this where not all ports for a switch are used by devices. Unused ports are calculated in the license, then the customer pays for license for those unused ports."
"Portnox CORE's pricing is adequate and cheaper compared to other complex solutions. Its licensing costs are yearly and include support. Cost is calculated per device."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Construction Company
12%
Performing Arts
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise15
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox Clear?
The pricing and setup cost as well as licensing is a bit high compared to the competition. If it were better, we could also have some pricing specific or special discounts to cater for SMBs.
What needs improvement with Portnox Clear?
If the MSSP offering could be the primary push or primary concern, it would be the best thing that could happen. Based on the Tanzanian market, AI governance is something that is coming through. Fo...
What is your primary use case for Portnox Clear?
Portnox is for the network access control use case. The use case focuses on wired network access, specifically how users are connecting to the network and how we are checking their security posture...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
Safe-T SDA, Safe-T, Safe-T Software-Defined Access
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sallie Mae, Roku, Vuori, Legal Zoom, Anaplan, Aecon, H.I.G. Capital, McLaren Construction Group, PFCU, UK Mortgage Lending Limited, CCC Intelligent Solutions
Government of Israel, eviCore Healthcore, Glen Imaging, Sarin, LBG, Rollomatic, Boegli-Gravures SA, Banque Heritage, Groupe Minoteries, Temenos, ZEK, RLM Finsbury, Harel Insurance, Meitav Dash
Find out what your peers are saying about Portnox vs. Safe-T Secure Application Access and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.