Aryaka Unified SASE as a Service vs Sangfor Access Secure: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

Aryaka Unified SASE as a Service

Mid-market and enterprise security teams managing distributed offices or remote workforces should evaluate Aryaka Unified SASE as a Service primarily for its single-pass inspection architecture, which eliminates the performance tax most SASE platforms impose on encrypted traffic. The platform's strength in PR.AA (Identity Management and Access Control) and PR.DS (Data Security) aligns with zero-trust enforcement and DLP simultaneously, reducing the number of tools you need to stitch together. Skip this if your priority is recovery and resilience orchestration; Aryaka is built for prevention and detection, not incident response automation.

Sangfor Access Secure

Mid-market and enterprise teams managing hybrid workforces across geographies should prioritize Sangfor Access Secure for its integrated SD-WAN and zero trust enforcement, which eliminates the operational tax of running separate network and access products. The platform covers NIST PR.AA (identity and access control) and DE.CM (continuous monitoring) with real-time visibility across users and traffic, plus AI-driven malware detection that catches what signature engines miss. Skip this if your organization requires deep incident response automation; Sangfor's strength is in continuous detection and access enforcement, not in the RS.AN (incident analysis) workflows that mature SOCs depend on.