How do they compare?
SecureTrust Cyber vs Perimeter 81
Perimeter 81 makes ZTNA easy for mid-market teams. But the rest of the stack (network security, data and operations) is thin.
Perimeter 81 is popular for making ZTNA approachable. If ZTNA is all you need, it is a fine choice. If you need the full security surface, the coverage is limited.
ZTNA-first, thin elsewhere
Strong access, but limited FWaaS, IPS, DLP and no security operations.
No SIEM or patch
Detection, compliance and patching are separate purchases.
Feature depth
Advanced DLP, CASB and AI security are limited or absent.
Why SecureTrust Cyber
Three reasons teams choose SecureTrust Cyber over Perimeter 81
Full SASE, not just ZTNA
Firewall, IPS, SWG, CASB and DLP alongside zero-trust access in one platform.
Security operations included
SIEM and managed patch are part of the platform, not an add-on.
Grow without switching
Start with access, expand to the full stack without replacing your security.
How do we compare?
SecureTrust Cyber vs Perimeter 81 2026
| Capability | SecureTrust Cyber | Perimeter 81 |
|---|---|---|
| Firewall-as-a-Service | Available | Available |
| Intrusion Prevention System | Available | Not available |
| DNS Security | Available | Available |
| Secure Web Gateway | Available | Available |
| Universal ZTNA | Available | Available |
| CASB | Available | Available |
| Data Loss Prevention | Available | Available |
| AI Security for End Users | Available | Not available |
| SIEM Platform | Available | Not available |
| Managed Patch Management | Available | Not available |
Outgrowing ZTNA-only?
Move to a full platform without losing the simplicity you like.
FAQ
About the comparison
Is SecureTrust Cyber as easy to deploy as Perimeter 81?
Comparison last verified: 2026-09-29.
See the difference for yourself
A 30-minute demo against your own environment.