“Using Pgy (Peanut Shell) for multi-site networking — connecting branch offices, connecting surveillance systems, and letting employees access the intranet from home — is quite convenient at a small scale. But as the company grows, is it still suitable for long-term use? Is there an alternative better suited to enterprises?” This is a question many IT administrators struggle with when evaluating options. Today we’ll explain clearly who multi-site networking tools like Pgy are suited for, what enterprises should watch out for when using them long term, and how to choose an enterprise-grade alternative.
The bottom line first
Tools like Pgy and Peanut Shell win on being inexpensive and quick to get started with, and suit individuals, small studios, temporary networking, and scenarios with low requirements for permissions and compliance. But if an enterprise wants to treat them as a long-term, formal foundation for remote access, it must consider permission granularity, compliance (MLPS), per-account authorization, offboarding revocation, long-term stability and service. Enterprises with high demands on these points are better served by an enterprise-oriented zero trust remote access solution, such as sTrust.
Who Pgy is suited for
To be clear: Pgy itself is a mature, well-built product and is very strong within its positioning. It is particularly suited to:
- Individuals / small teams: a home NAS, remote desktop, or a few people in a small studio sharing resources
- Temporary / simple networking: quickly connecting two or three sites, with no demanding permission management
- Budget-sensitive, few devices: buy a box, plug it in and it works, at low cost
For long-term enterprise use, think about these points
When the organization grows, more people need intranet access, and MLPS and audits come into play, “being able to connect” is only the passing grade. What really takes effort is the following:
① Are permissions granular enough: enterprises need precise, per-person and per-department control over who can access which server or system — not a single flat intranet once you connect.
② Will it pass compliance: MLPS 2.0 and internal audits require that access be controllable, auditable, and logged; in a formal production environment there is no way around this.
③ Is personnel change easy to manage: with dozens or hundreds of people, onboarding provisioning and offboarding revocation must be fast and clean, with no loose ends.
④ Stability and service: critical business depends on it, so when something goes wrong someone must respond quickly — ideally local service in Chinese.
Pgy networking vs. enterprise zero trust: what’s the difference
| Aspect | Pgy-style networking | Enterprise zero trust (e.g., sTrust) |
|---|---|---|
| Positioning | Multi-site networking | Enterprise-grade secure access |
| Permission granularity | Network-level | Authorization by account / department / application |
| Compliance / MLPS | Not a focus | ICP-registered · supports MLPS 2.0 |
| Personnel management | Coarse | Provisioning on onboarding · one-click revocation on offboarding |
| Access auditing | Limited | Auditable · logged |
| Experience / service in China | Good | Stable direct connections in China · local service in Chinese |
| Best for | Individuals / small teams / temporary | Enterprises in formal production |
So how should you choose?
In one sentence: for few devices, simple requirements, individuals or small teams, Pgy / Peanut Shell is sufficient and cost-effective; if an enterprise needs to give a group of people long-term, secure, compliant intranet access (ERP, finance, file servers, internal systems), we recommend an enterprise-oriented zero trust remote access solution — authorization by account, one-click revocation on offboarding, supports MLPS, stable direct connections in China, no hardware to buy, provisioned as software. Beijing enterprises that want local implementation can also have Siwenlide package networking, security, and remote access together.
FAQ
Q: Is Pgy bad? Why would an enterprise switch?
A: Pgy works very well for individuals and small-scale networking. When an enterprise switches, it’s usually not because Pgy is bad, but because the enterprise has higher requirements for permission granularity, compliance and MLPS, personnel revocation, and audit logs — areas where enterprise-grade zero trust excels.
Q: Is enterprise-grade zero trust expensive and hard to adopt?
A: Not necessarily. Solutions like sTrust are provisioned as software — no hardware to buy and no networking expertise required. You can provision access for an employee in 5 minutes and revoke it with one click on offboarding; it works for small and mid-sized businesses too.
Q: We already use Pgy. Is migration a hassle?
A: No. Just switch employees to the new client and re-authorize them by permission; the intranet-side configuration is completed with the service provider’s assistance, so the transition is smooth.
Q: Will it pass MLPS?
A: sTrust’s control plane is located in China and is ICP-registered; access is controllable, auditable, and logged, and it supports the remote access requirements of MLPS 2.0.
Need long-term, secure, compliant intranet access for your enterprise?
sTrust zero trust remote access: authorization by account, one-click revocation on offboarding, supports MLPS 2.0, stable direct connections in China, provisioned as software with no hardware to buy. Visit strust.siwenlide.com for a free trial; Beijing enterprises wanting local implementation can call 400-686-2011 or visit siwenlide.com.
