Top 10 Best Remote Network Access Software of 2026

GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE

Technology Digital Media

Top 10 Best Remote Network Access Software of 2026

Top 10 remote network access software picks with ranking criteria and tradeoffs for IT teams managing secure access, incl. Entra, StrongDM.

10 tools compared34 min readUpdated todayAI-verified · Expert reviewed
How we ranked these tools
01Feature Verification

Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.

02Multimedia Review Aggregation

Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.

03Synthetic User Modeling

AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.

04Human Editorial Review

Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.

Read our full methodology →

Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%

Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy

Remote network access software controls how identities reach private apps, subnets, and services with RBAC, policy evaluation, and auditable access decisions instead of broad network exposure. This ranked list targets IT admins and security engineers who need verifiable automation, API-driven provisioning, and consistent telemetry across deployment models, and it orders tools by how cleanly they translate identity to network access controls.

Microsoft Entra Private Access is the best pick for enterprises that want identity-controlled, per-app access to private internal resources without broad VPN exposure, while StrongDM fits security teams needing identity-governed privileged remote access across many hosts.

Editor’s top 3 picks

Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.

Editor pick
1

Microsoft Entra Private Access

Entra-managed private app access uses identity policies to gate connectivity per destination, with access events tied to Entra authentication telemetry.

Built for fits when enterprises want identity-controlled, per-app access to private apps without broad VPN exposure..

2

StrongDM

Editor pick

Session governance with approval and time-bound access tied to RBAC policies and full audit trails.

Built for fits when security teams need identity-governed privileged remote access across many hosts..

3

FortiClient

Editor pick

Host posture enforcement that feeds FortiGate access decisions from within the FortiClient agent.

Built for fits when FortiGate-centric teams need endpoint posture-gated remote access for large user groups..

Comparison Table

Remote network access software controls how identities reach private apps, subnets, and services with RBAC, policy evaluation, and auditable access decisions instead of broad network exposure. This ranked list targets IT admins and security engineers who need verifiable automation, API-driven provisioning, and consistent telemetry across deployment models, and it orders tools by how cleanly they translate identity to network access controls.

1
enterprise
9.3/10
Overall
2
API-first
9.0/10
Overall
3
enterprise
8.8/10
Overall
4
8.4/10
Overall
5
enterprise
8.1/10
Overall
6
7.8/10
Overall
7
7.6/10
Overall
8
7.2/10
Overall
9
7.0/10
Overall
10
API-first
6.7/10
Overall
#1

Microsoft Entra Private Access

enterprise

Identity-based private access for internal applications and resources without traditional VPN exposure.

9.3/10
Overall
Features9.2/10
Ease of Use9.5/10
Value9.4/10
Standout feature

Entra-managed private app access uses identity policies to gate connectivity per destination, with access events tied to Entra authentication telemetry.

Entra Private Access is built around identity-driven access to private resources, with policies that map authenticated users to allowed destinations and actions. Connectivity is delivered through Entra-managed brokers and tunnels, which reduces the need to expose internal services directly to the internet. Governance ties into Entra administration patterns such as group-based access and audit log visibility for who accessed which resource.

A key tradeoff is that the connectivity model is centered on client-based access, so browser-only or agentless connectivity is not the primary path. It fits environments where private line-of-business apps run behind non-internet-facing network segments and require identity-aware access without building and maintaining a traditional perimeter VPN.

Pros
  • +Identity-first access policies map users and groups to private destinations
  • +Cloud-managed brokerage reduces bespoke gateway and routing maintenance
  • +Entra audit trails connect access decisions to authentication activity
  • +Per-resource authorization limits exposure compared with broad network tunnels
Cons
  • Client-based connectivity is a constraint for agentless remote access needs
  • Complex environments may require careful network and endpoint integration work
  • Less suited for legacy TCP workflows that expect direct network reachability
  • Operational troubleshooting spans identity policy and tunnel connectivity layers
Use scenarios
  • IT security and access engineering

    Control access to private internal apps

    Reduced unintended lateral access

  • Operations teams with field users

    Remote access to factory or office systems

    Fewer firewall openings

Show 2 more scenarios
  • IT admins standardizing identity

    Centralize authorization in Entra

    Consistent access control

    Entra group membership drives private access authorization at scale.

  • Compliance teams

    Track access decisions and activity

    Better audit traceability

    Access activity aligns with Entra authentication and administrative governance records.

Best for: Fits when enterprises want identity-controlled, per-app access to private apps without broad VPN exposure.

#2

StrongDM

API-first

Identity-aware access platform for infrastructure, servers, databases, and private network resources.

9.0/10
Overall
Features9.1/10
Ease of Use9.1/10
Value8.9/10
Standout feature

Session governance with approval and time-bound access tied to RBAC policies and full audit trails.

StrongDM focuses on governing privileged remote access with identity-first RBAC, session-level controls, and audit logs for administrative activity. It supports SSH and RDP routing through StrongDM-managed connections, plus controlled access to internal services through its application and host catalog approach. Automation is exposed through an API surface that lets admins provision users, groups, and access policies and keep those aligned with directory changes.

A tradeoff appears when teams need agentless, browser-only access to every target since StrongDM centers on a managed connection model. It fits best when operations and security teams must reduce standing access and enforce repeatable authorization for admins across many servers.

Pros
  • +Identity-driven RBAC that governs host and application access
  • +Session-level audit logs for privileged SSH and RDP activity
  • +Approval and time-bound access patterns for administrative workflows
  • +API for provisioning users, groups, and access policies
Cons
  • Managed connection model adds onboarding steps for each resource
  • Complex RBAC mappings can increase admin workload at scale
  • Browser-only access coverage depends on target application setup
  • Policy changes require careful rollout to avoid session disruptions
Use scenarios
  • Security engineering teams

    Enforce approval-based privileged access

    Reduced standing admin access

  • Platform operations teams

    Manage SSH and RDP at scale

    Fewer access exceptions

Show 2 more scenarios
  • IT admins in regulated orgs

    Produce audit-ready session trails

    Faster investigations

    Keeps action-level session records tied to identity for administrative accountability.

  • Identity and access admins

    Automate onboarding and role updates

    Lower manual access churn

    Uses API-driven provisioning to align StrongDM access with directory group membership changes.

Best for: Fits when security teams need identity-governed privileged remote access across many hosts.

#3

FortiClient

enterprise

Endpoint security client that provides VPN, Zero Trust access, and secure connectivity to private networks.

8.8/10
Overall
Features8.9/10
Ease of Use8.7/10
Value8.7/10
Standout feature

Host posture enforcement that feeds FortiGate access decisions from within the FortiClient agent.

FortiClient acts as the agent-side control point for remote users, where user and device identity travel with the VPN session to the FortiGate policy engine. It supports common remote access patterns through the Fortinet ecosystem, including encrypted tunnels and client-managed connection profiles that can be pushed from central management. The host component also enables endpoint posture checks that influence whether the session is allowed or restricted.

A key tradeoff is that FortiClient’s governance depth is most compelling when Fortinet devices handle policy and authentication, which can increase dependence on that vendor stack. FortiClient fits best for enterprises that need consistent endpoint posture enforcement and centralized access policies for remote workers and contractors.

Pros
  • +Endpoint posture checks can gate remote VPN sessions
  • +Central Fortinet policy links user identity and device access rules
  • +Client-managed connection profiles reduce per-user setup drift
  • +Works smoothly with FortiGate-based remote access policies
Cons
  • Deeper control depends on Fortinet authentication and policy integration
  • Troubleshooting can require coordination between client logs and gateway logs
  • Large deployments need careful endpoint policy rollout planning
  • Some non-Fortinet gateway scenarios add compatibility complexity
Use scenarios
  • IT security teams

    Gate VPN access on endpoint health

    Fewer unmanaged endpoints on VPN

  • FortiGate operators

    Centralize remote access policies

    Consistent policy behavior across users

Show 2 more scenarios
  • Remote workforce admins

    Push client connection profiles at scale

    Lower support volume for VPN issues

    Managed connection settings reduce manual steps during onboarding and rekeying.

  • Managed service providers

    Standardize access across tenants

    Repeatable rollout procedures

    FortiClient deployment patterns can support tenant-specific access configuration using shared governance.

Best for: Fits when FortiGate-centric teams need endpoint posture-gated remote access for large user groups.

#4

Zscaler Private Access

enterprise

Zero Trust Network Access software for private applications and internal network resources.

8.4/10
Overall
Features8.2/10
Ease of Use8.6/10
Value8.6/10
Standout feature

The Zscaler enforcement plane ties access authorization to user, device posture, and policy in one flow for every private session.

Zscaler Private Access delivers client-based secure access to internal apps and networks through Zscaler’s cloud-delivered policy enforcement. It supports per-user and per-device access decisions that combine identity, network context, and endpoint posture so sessions only start when rules match.

Connector-based routing sends traffic from the private access client to internal services without exposing inbound ports from the internet. Admin controls focus on policy configuration, session controls, and audit trails tied to access events.

Pros
  • +Policy-driven access decisions tied to user and endpoint signals
  • +Built for connector-based routing to private destinations
  • +Centralized audit trails for access events and session activity
  • +Works well for least-privilege segmentation across many apps
Cons
  • Initial connector and network path design takes planning
  • Deep posture and identity integrations increase setup scope
  • Troubleshooting depends on correct client logs and policy matches
  • Some private app behaviors require careful proxy and routing validation

Best for: Fits when distributed teams need identity- and device-aware access to private apps without inbound network exposure.

#5

Prisma Access

enterprise

Cloud security platform that provides secure remote access to applications and corporate networks.

8.1/10
Overall
Features8.4/10
Ease of Use7.9/10
Value8.0/10
Standout feature

Cloud-delivered security policy enforcement that applies consistent identity-based access controls at the service edge for remote users.

Prisma Access provides a client-based remote access gateway that enforces security policy while users connect to private resources. It uses a cloud-delivered policy engine with identity-driven access controls, granular traffic inspection, and centralized logging for session auditing.

The deployment model supports both user access and network connectivity use cases through software-defined service edges rather than on-prem appliances. Integration depth comes from policy, identity, and networking controls that work together for consistent access behavior across sites and devices.

Pros
  • +Granular per-app and per-user access policy tied to identity
  • +Centralized traffic visibility with session-level audit trails
  • +Cloud-delivered policy enforcement reduces site appliance sprawl
  • +Supports flexible routing and tunnel behavior for private resources
Cons
  • Policy and routing design takes time for large environments
  • Operational overhead rises when many user groups need bespoke rules
  • Troubleshooting can require knowledge of service edge and tunnel paths
  • Some legacy client workflows need explicit compatibility planning

Best for: Fits when enterprise teams need identity-centric, cloud-enforced remote access with centralized audit and fine-grained policy.

#6

OpenVPN Access Server

SMB

Self-managed VPN server software for secure remote access to private networks and applications.

7.8/10
Overall
Features8.0/10
Ease of Use7.9/10
Value7.6/10
Standout feature

A built-in management and configuration layer that automates certificate-based VPN provisioning through an admin API.

OpenVPN Access Server is a remote network access gateway focused on client-based SSL VPN connectivity with certificate-based authentication and per-user configuration. It provides centralized administration for VPN policies, user accounts, and device profiles, with a built-in control plane for managing remote clients.

Access Server also includes client tooling for Linux, Windows, macOS, and mobile platforms, plus an API surface for automation around provisioning and configuration. For teams that need operational control over tunnels and credentials without building a custom gateway stack, it serves as an integrated management layer.

Pros
  • +Central admin UI manages users, certificates, and VPN profiles in one place
  • +Provisioning and configuration support via a documented API for automation
  • +Extensible authentication workflows integrate with existing identity sources
  • +Good throughput for IP routing use cases with configurable crypto settings
Cons
  • RBAC granularity and governance controls can require careful admin role planning
  • Client configuration templates need maintenance when network routes change
  • Advanced deployment patterns often require deeper familiarity with OpenVPN directives
  • Operational logging exports take more effort for deep audit retention workflows

Best for: Fits when teams need centralized SSL VPN gateway management with API-driven provisioning and controlled routing.

#7

Twingate

SMB

Zero Trust remote access software for private networks, applications, and cloud resources.

7.6/10
Overall
Features7.6/10
Ease of Use7.5/10
Value7.6/10
Standout feature

Resource-level access mapping tied to identity and client sessions, with centralized policy configuration and access event visibility.

Twingate is a client-based remote network access gateway that maps internal resources to identities instead of exposing a network perimeter. Access is granted through authenticated sessions that can be constrained by user and group, along with device and network context controls.

Integration depth is driven by identity-provider connections and automated provisioning hooks used to keep access lists current. Governance focuses on auditable access events and admin configuration that supports repeatable policy rollout across teams.

Pros
  • +Identity-provider integration keeps RBAC aligned with workforce changes
  • +Policy-based resource mapping avoids broad network exposure
  • +Device-aware access controls reduce unmanaged endpoint access
  • +Fine-grained session controls support per-app or per-host targeting
Cons
  • Client-based access requires endpoint installation and maintenance
  • Initial resource mapping work increases setup time for large estates
  • Some network discovery workflows depend on configuration rather than automation
  • Audit trail detail can lag for complex, short-lived access patterns

Best for: Fits when identity-driven network access is needed for developers and operations across many internal apps.

#8

NetBird

SMB

Open-source WireGuard-based network access platform with centralized identity and policy management.

7.2/10
Overall
Features7.0/10
Ease of Use7.3/10
Value7.5/10
Standout feature

Policy-based device-to-device connectivity enforced inside the overlay, with client identity tied to join state to control reachability.

NetBird is a client-based remote network access solution that creates a virtual private network using a peer-to-peer mesh with a coordination backend. Network access is managed as an overlay network where devices join the same secure network and reach allowed peers over the underlying transport.

NetBird supports policy-based access control for who can reach which peers, plus device identity tied to the client join process. Admin workflows focus on onboarding, group membership, and visibility into connected clients and access paths.

Pros
  • +Agent-based overlay network reduces VPN gateway management overhead
  • +Policy-driven peer access limits lateral movement within the mesh
  • +Device onboarding ties connectivity to identity and join state
  • +Operational visibility shows connected clients and effective access
Cons
  • Relies on client installation for network-level access use cases
  • Mesh connectivity and routing can require careful network planning
  • Advanced governance needs external process around identity lifecycle
  • Large multi-site environments need tuning for throughput and discovery

Best for: Fits when teams need identity-gated network access with low gateway footprint across many small sites.

#9

NordLayer

SMB

Business VPN and Zero Trust access platform for protected employee and application connectivity.

7.0/10
Overall
Features7.0/10
Ease of Use6.8/10
Value7.1/10
Standout feature

On-demand virtual network access tied to authenticated users and enrolled endpoints, with policy-based routing through the NordLayer gateway.

NordLayer runs a managed remote access network that assigns teams to virtual networks and tunnels traffic to private resources. Client-based access supports identity-linked device onboarding, so policies can key off the authenticated user and connected endpoint.

Administrators configure per-user access rules and routing through NordLayer’s network gateway, rather than managing per-host VPN configurations. The product focuses on controlled connectivity for small-to-mid environments that need frequent onboarding and repeatable access policies.

Pros
  • +Central gateway configuration for consistent client-based connectivity
  • +Identity-linked onboarding supports per-user access control decisions
  • +Virtual network segmentation keeps shared resources isolated
  • +Automation-friendly configuration patterns for recurring employee access
Cons
  • Tight network design is required to avoid over-broad routing
  • Advanced admin workflows depend on integrating external identity systems
  • Application-level use cases need extra components outside NordLayer
  • Deep observability depends on logging integration setup

Best for: Fits when mid-size teams need identity-linked virtual network access with controlled routing and repeatable onboarding.

#10

Teleport

API-first

Identity-native access platform for servers, Kubernetes clusters, databases, and internal applications.

6.7/10
Overall
Features6.5/10
Ease of Use6.8/10
Value6.7/10
Standout feature

Teleport access-plane brokering that unifies SSH and Kubernetes access under the same RBAC and audited session model.

Teleport is a remote access solution that ties SSH and Kubernetes access to identity, policy, and audited sessions. It routes users through a centralized access plane that brokers short-lived credentials to remote targets and cluster resources.

Teleport supports role-based access controls, multi-factor authentication, and session recording hooks for privileged workflows. It also includes administration features for managing clusters, users, and access policies across multiple environments.

Pros
  • +Identity-driven access for SSH and Kubernetes with consistent policy enforcement
  • +Granular RBAC controls for users, roles, and resources across environments
  • +Session auditing and replay support for privileged access investigations
  • +Works with centralized access-plane routing for controllable remote entry
Cons
  • Kubernetes integrations require careful cluster configuration and ongoing maintenance
  • Policy management can feel rigid when teams need frequent exceptions
  • Operational overhead increases with multiple clusters and access roles
  • Customizing workflows often depends on Teleport-specific configuration patterns

Best for: Fits when teams need identity-based access control spanning SSH servers and Kubernetes clusters.

Conclusion

After evaluating 10 technology digital media, Microsoft Entra Private Access stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.

Our Top Pick
Microsoft Entra Private Access

Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.

How to Choose the Right remote network access software

This buyer's guide covers Microsoft Entra Private Access, StrongDM, FortiClient, Zscaler Private Access, Prisma Access, OpenVPN Access Server, Twingate, NetBird, NordLayer, and Teleport for remote network access.

The sections below map concrete capabilities from each tool to real selection decisions, including identity gating, session governance, device posture checks, and cloud-delivered enforcement paths.

Remote access platforms that broker authenticated access to private apps and network resources

Remote network access software brokers connections from remote devices to private destinations using identity signals, device context, and policy rules. It prevents broad VPN-style exposure by routing sessions only when access decisions match the configured policies.

Teams commonly use it to replace static tunnel credentials with per-user authorization and to centralize audit trails for remote sessions. Microsoft Entra Private Access and Zscaler Private Access show this model by tying access authorization to authentication telemetry and policy enforcement in their respective access planes.

Evaluation criteria mapped to how these tools actually grant and control sessions

Remote network access tools differ most in where access policy is evaluated, what entity drives authorization, and how much operational detail administrators can audit after a session starts.

The criteria below focus on identity-to-destination mapping, session-level governance, device posture signals, and the automation and integration surfaces that keep large estates manageable.

  • Per-destination access gating driven by identity signals

    Microsoft Entra Private Access gates connectivity to private apps using Entra identity signals and cloud-managed brokerage per destination. Zscaler Private Access and Twingate also tie access decisions to user identity and client sessions instead of static network credentials.

  • Session governance with approval patterns and auditable privileged actions

    StrongDM applies approval and time-bound access patterns to privileged SSH and RDP sessions and records session-level audit logs for every session action. Teleport also anchors audited sessions to an access plane for SSH and Kubernetes so privileged activity has replayable audit support.

  • Device posture and endpoint signals feeding the access decision

    FortiClient enforces host posture checks inside the FortiClient agent and feeds those decisions into FortiGate access behavior. Zscaler Private Access similarly combines user and device posture in the enforcement flow before sessions start.

  • Cloud service edge enforcement with centralized traffic visibility

    Prisma Access uses cloud-delivered service edges to apply identity-based security policies consistently across sites. It also provides centralized traffic visibility with session-level audit trails that help administrators debug policy matches and tunnel behavior.

  • API-driven provisioning and certificate-based gateway administration

    OpenVPN Access Server includes an admin API that supports automation for certificate-based VPN provisioning and centralized management of users, certificates, and VPN profiles. This reduces manual configuration drift when onboarding many clients and updating tunnel credentials.

  • Overlay network access with policy-based device-to-device reachability

    NetBird builds an overlay network mesh where policy-based peer access controls who can reach which devices. Its client identity ties to the join process, which constrains reachability inside the overlay without exposing inbound ports.

  • Integrated access-plane brokering across multiple resource types

    Teleport unifies SSH server and Kubernetes cluster access under the same RBAC and audited session model by routing users through a centralized access plane. This supports consistent access control across multiple admin targets using one policy framework.

A policy-routing decision framework for remote network access

Start by deciding whether the primary control point should be identity-based private app access, privileged session brokerage, or endpoint posture-gated network access. Each control point maps to specific tool strengths such as per-app Entra brokerage in Microsoft Entra Private Access or approval-driven session governance in StrongDM.

Next decide how the tool fits the network architecture. Some tools use client-based overlay connectivity like NetBird and others use connector-based routing and enforcement like Zscaler Private Access and NordLayer.

  • Choose the access control model: per-app private access vs privileged session brokerage vs network overlay

    For identity-controlled per-app access without broad VPN exposure, start with Microsoft Entra Private Access or Zscaler Private Access because they broker private app connectivity with policy decisions tied to authentication and device signals. For privileged SSH and RDP governance with approvals and time-bound access, StrongDM is built around session governance tied to RBAC. For developer and ops access across many internal apps without broad network exposure, Twingate emphasizes resource mapping to identities and client sessions.

  • Match the tool to the traffic routing architecture in the environment

    If private app traffic is easiest to route through connectors into internal services, Zscaler Private Access centers connector-based routing with a cloud enforcement plane. If the environment favors service-edge deployment with centralized inspection and audit, Prisma Access fits because it applies consistent identity-based controls at the service edge. If the environment prefers on-demand virtual networks with gateway-driven routing, NordLayer aligns to its virtual network segmentation and policy-based routing model.

  • Require device trust signals only when the deployment can support endpoint posture

    When access must be gated by host posture and tied to FortiGate behavior, FortiClient fits because posture enforcement is performed in the FortiClient agent and then linked to FortiGate access rules. If the deployment cannot consistently install and maintain endpoint agents, avoid leaning on tools whose primary access constraints assume client-based access, such as FortiClient and NetBird. Teleport can still work as a control plane for SSH and Kubernetes even when endpoint posture is not the primary gating signal.

  • Plan for privileged workflow controls and audit depth for forensic needs

    If privileged activity requires approvals, time-bound access, and full session action audit logs, StrongDM provides session governance and audit trails at the session level. If privileged workflows require session auditing and replay-style investigation across SSH and Kubernetes, Teleport provides access-plane brokering with RBAC and audited sessions. If the requirement is centralized identity telemetry tied to access events for private app connectivity, Microsoft Entra Private Access provides Entra audit trail integration for access decisions.

  • Size automation and provisioning workload around API and configuration surfaces

    When certificate-based VPN onboarding needs automation and centralized admin control, use OpenVPN Access Server because it offers a documented API for provisioning users, certificates, and VPN profiles. If identity integrations must stay aligned with workforce changes, choose tools that emphasize identity-provider integration and automated provisioning hooks such as Twingate. If the environment needs consistent client enrollment and repeatable access rules for teams, NordLayer and NetBird emphasize onboarding workflows and policy-driven access paths.

  • Confirm compatibility with legacy connectivity expectations and network discovery workflows

    If legacy TCP workflows need direct network reachability, be cautious because Microsoft Entra Private Access focuses on client-based connectivity to internal resources rather than agentless reachability. If network discovery depends on automation rather than manual mapping, Twingate and NetBird both rely on resource mapping and configuration steps that can increase setup time in large estates. If troubleshooting must be isolated to one layer, remember that Prisma Access and FortiClient can require coordinating client logs with service-edge or gateway paths.

Which organizations get the most value from these remote network access tools

Different teams need different control points for remote connectivity. Some organizations prioritize per-app access policy tied to identity events. Others need privileged session governance across many hosts or cloud-delivered inspection at a service edge.

The segments below reflect the actual best-fit use cases mapped to each tool.

  • Enterprises that want per-app private access controlled by identity telemetry

    Microsoft Entra Private Access fits when internal apps should be reachable only through Entra-managed private app access with access events linked to Entra authentication telemetry. Zscaler Private Access is a strong alternative when sessions must also combine user and device posture with centralized enforcement and audit trails.

  • Security teams governing privileged remote access across SSH, RDP, and admin portals

    StrongDM fits when the requirement is identity-governed privileged remote access with approval and time-bound patterns and session-level audit logs for every action. Teleport fits when the governance scope spans SSH servers and Kubernetes with unified RBAC and audited sessions through a centralized access plane.

  • FortiGate-centric teams that can standardize endpoint posture checks

    FortiClient fits when endpoint posture enforcement is needed and FortiGate policies should be fed by the FortiClient agent. This model is aimed at large user groups where device access behavior must be consistent and centrally linked to Fortinet policy rules.

  • Distributed teams that need device-aware access to private apps without inbound network exposure

    Zscaler Private Access fits when access authorization must be tied to user identity and device posture in one enforcement flow while connector routing avoids inbound port exposure. Twingate fits when access must stay identity-aware and resource-mapped across many internal apps for developers and operations.

  • Small to mid-size teams that want onboarding-friendly identity-linked virtual network access

    NordLayer fits when the priority is repeatable onboarding and controlled routing through a managed gateway with per-user access rules and virtual network segmentation. NetBird fits when teams want low gateway footprint using an overlay mesh where policy controls device-to-device reachability tied to join identity.

Common failure modes when selecting remote network access software

Remote network access failures usually come from mismatched access model expectations, missing governance depth for privileged workflows, or configuration assumptions that do not match the target environment. The pitfalls below map to concrete cons seen across the tools.

Avoid these paths when tool capabilities and operating models do not align.

  • Expecting agentless access for tools built around client-based connectivity

    Microsoft Entra Private Access and FortiClient both assume client-based connectivity for their core access enforcement, which limits fit for agentless remote access needs. NetBird also relies on client installation for network-level access in the overlay mesh.

  • Underestimating the operational workload of identity and RBAC mappings at scale

    StrongDM can increase admin workload when RBAC mappings become complex across many resources, and policy changes require careful rollout to avoid session disruptions. Teleport can feel rigid when teams need frequent exceptions to RBAC policy rules across multiple clusters and roles.

  • Skipping connector, routing, or service-edge path planning before onboarding private apps

    Zscaler Private Access requires planning for connector and network path design so policy matches and routing work as intended. Prisma Access and NordLayer also require time to design policy and routing behavior because troubleshooting depends on correct service-edge or gateway paths.

  • Choosing endpoint posture gating when endpoint management cannot be standardized

    FortiClient depends on endpoint posture enforcement inside the FortiClient agent to feed FortiGate access decisions. If endpoint policy rollout cannot be standardized, device-aware gating becomes inconsistent and troubleshooting requires coordination across client and gateway logs.

  • Assuming that overlay connectivity will scale without network planning

    NetBird’s mesh connectivity and routing require careful network planning, and advanced governance needs external identity lifecycle processes. Large multi-site environments also require throughput and discovery tuning so overlay peer reachability stays predictable.

How We Selected and Ranked These Tools

We evaluated Microsoft Entra Private Access, StrongDM, FortiClient, Zscaler Private Access, Prisma Access, OpenVPN Access Server, Twingate, NetBird, NordLayer, and Teleport using three criteria. Features carried the most weight at 40% because remote network access depends on policy enforcement behavior, session controls, and identity integration depth. Ease of use and value each accounted for 30% because organizations need predictable admin operations and manageable outcomes when onboarding users and devices.

We rated each product using its reported feature coverage, operational complexity signals like setup and troubleshooting scope, and how well automation and governance controls were positioned. Microsoft Entra Private Access ranked highest because it combines identity-controlled, per-destination private app access with Entra authentication telemetry in its cloud-managed brokerage, which directly improved the features score and supported high ease-of-use outcomes through centralized Entra policy mapping.

Frequently Asked Questions About remote network access software

How do StrongDM and Teleport differ in how they broker privileged remote access sessions?
StrongDM brokers SSH, RDP, and web admin sessions through an access gateway that enforces RBAC and approval workflows per session action. Teleport brokers short-lived credentials through a centralized access plane that unifies SSH and Kubernetes access with audited sessions and session recording hooks.
Which tool supports per-app access control for private endpoints using identity signals rather than broad network tunneling?
Microsoft Entra Private Access ties access decisions to Entra identity signals and routes connections to private endpoints using cloud-managed access policies. Zscaler Private Access also enforces user and device context, but it focuses on client-based policy enforcement for private app sessions through the Zscaler service edge.
How does OpenVPN Access Server handle authentication and provisioning compared with OpenVPN-like setups that rely on static VPN credentials?
OpenVPN Access Server uses certificate-based authentication and central administration for VPN policies, user accounts, and device profiles. Its built-in admin layer includes an API for automating certificate and client provisioning, which reduces manual tunnel setup compared with static credential distribution.
When should an organization choose Twingate over NetBird for internal access model design?
Twingate maps internal resources to identities and constrains access with authenticated sessions plus identity-provider connections. NetBird instead creates an overlay VPN using a peer-to-peer mesh, so the design centers on device-to-device reachability within the overlay and policy-based peer access.
What integrations and automation hooks exist for keeping access lists aligned with identity systems?
Twingate uses identity-provider connections and automated provisioning hooks to keep access mapping current. StrongDM integrates with common identity providers and directory data so RBAC groups and session governance reflect identity changes.
How do FortiClient and Zscaler Private Access differ in where security policy enforcement happens?
FortiClient is a remote access client that pairs endpoint controls like posture and policy enforcement with connectivity handled through Fortinet VPN gateways. Zscaler Private Access enforces policy in the cloud-delivered service edge and starts sessions only when identity, network context, and endpoint posture rules match.
What breaks if device posture checking is a hard requirement but the tool only supports identity-based controls?
Entra Private Access ties authorization to Entra identity signals and private endpoint routing, but posture enforcement depends on what Entra signals and device attributes are available for policy evaluation. FortiClient is built for posture-gated access so posture requirements stay enforced at the client-to-gateway handoff.
How are audit logs and session visibility handled in StrongDM versus Teleport?
StrongDM records detailed audit logging for every session action tied to approval workflows and RBAC session governance. Teleport ties audited sessions to its access-plane brokering model and includes session recording hooks for privileged workflows like SSH and Kubernetes access.
Which tool fits centralized administration for both SSH access and Kubernetes access under one identity-driven policy model?
Teleport supports SSH and Kubernetes access under the same identity, policy, and audited session model through its centralized access plane. StrongDM also centralizes privileged access decisions, but it is organized around SSH, RDP, and web admin session governance rather than Kubernetes-specific access brokering.
What admin controls enable repeatable rollout across teams in NordLayer compared with per-host tunnel management?
NordLayer assigns teams to virtual networks and tunnels traffic through its network gateway, so administrators configure per-user access rules and routing centrally. That reduces the need for per-host VPN configuration and onboarding steps that can become inconsistent across a distributed fleet.

Tools reviewed

Primary sources checked during evaluation.

Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.

Logos provided by Logo.dev

Keep exploring

FOR SOFTWARE VENDORS

Not on this list? Let’s fix that.

Our best-of pages are how many teams discover and compare tools in this space. If you think your product belongs in this lineup, we’d like to hear from you—we’ll walk you through fit and what an editorial entry looks like.

Apply for a Listing

WHAT THIS INCLUDES

  • Where buyers compare

    Readers come to these pages to shortlist software—your product shows up in that moment, not in a random sidebar.

  • Editorial write-up

    We describe your product in our own words and check the facts before anything goes live.

  • On-page brand presence

    You appear in the roundup the same way as other tools we cover: name, positioning, and a clear next step for readers who want to learn more.

  • Kept up to date

    We refresh lists on a regular rhythm so the category page stays useful as products and pricing change.