Cisco Secure Access Reviews

As of today, my main use cases for Cisco Secure Access are VPN solutions, and I'm looking forward to having more SASE solutions.

Indeed, I would say that since the VPN solutions that we have delivered and that our customers are consuming today are not that flexible, if we can transform them to SASE solutions instead, we could make more policy-based access and level up the security.

Since we are a partner to Cisco and we are working in the business-to-business with our customers, they rely on us to be a trusted advisor and a solution partner that can deliver secure solutions for their needs, and secure access is very much a part of securing their environments.

I do not use VPN in Cisco Secure Access yet.

In some customer solutions, we have done ZTNA, and we are very eager to get more of these SASE solutions in this ZTNA.

The feature I like the most about Cisco Secure Access is the posture of devices, to make sure that everything that is connected to my network is okay in terms of patching and all that part, ensuring that the device is okay if they are about to connect to my network.

For ZTNA, it is both client-based and clientless.

Overall, if I have to rate Cisco Secure Access from one to ten, with one being worst and ten being best, I would give it an eight.

In general, what can be improved about this solution is to not change the name of everything every year, as Cisco marketing are experts at making changes to everything, and I don't understand what this is; that was the AnyConnect VPN, and now it's Cisco Secure Access, and what's tomorrow? I would suggest trying to keep the names of products and services for some years.

Since I'm a pre-sale, I discuss Cisco Secure Access or the legacy of solutions for also more than ten years.

I did not use the customer service at any point.

I didn't think about another solution before choosing this one since we're moving into many services more and more, and we're basing the managed services on Cisco solutions; I would prefer to use as much of Cisco ecosystem in our managed services, as it's easier for us as a service provider to handle the customer needs if we can have everything in one ecosystem.

We have partnered with other vendors like Check Point and Fortinet, but I would prefer Cisco if possible.

I don't think it's complicated to describe the experience deploying Cisco Secure Access; my technicians say it's quite straightforward.

You have to ask an engineer whether the documentation about how to do it is good.

Since our customers buy it, there is a return on investment; I don't know the time frame for a complete ROI, but it exists.

I cannot speak to how Cisco Secure Access deployment has impacted the help desk ticket volume and end-user experience because I'm in pre-sales.

I am not using the AI assistant feature yet, but I am planning to in the near future.

I haven't tried it, so I can't really evaluate it.

Regarding how it affected my transition to Zero Trust; since the transition is usually a customer project that takes a lot of time, our engineers know how to do it, but the customer is very reluctant to put the information into the solution that gives the security and the least privilege principles that we need; we can make the rules, but we need the information into the rules from the customer to make sure that the least privilege is working, and it's a tricky part.

It depends on the customer if I'm using a hybrid private access, since we are delivering it to many different sectors in the business-to-business area.

I'm not sure about varying the enforcement location for ZTNA Private Access.

I have no experience with the Experience Insight feature, which is a digital experience monitoring.

I don't think I have integrated Cisco Identity Intelligence with Cisco Secure Access.

I think the multi-organization management capability of Cisco Secure Access is moving in the right direction in terms of visibility and efficiency.

My experience is that Cisco has been in an area where there have been many different solutions for security, and now they are converging, but they are moving into more of a 360 view, and I have more or less everything in the same platform, so Cisco is moving in the right direction.

There is nothing else more technical I would like to add.

My overall rating for this product is an eight.

Hybrid Cloud

The main use case for Cisco Secure Access is for posture management, managing network devices, guaranteeing guest access, BYOD, guest, and sponsor portal. I have used Cisco Secure Access from end to end.

I consider network segmentation as one of the most valuable functions of Cisco Secure Access.

I use the Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) feature of Cisco Secure Access, and we have currently deployed it for ZTNA. I appreciate the identity management of devices where they are connecting to the network. The device needs to be trusted always, which is actually a good security best practice because it does not involve trusting a device once and then allowing it network access.

I have experience with the integration of CASB functionality in Cisco Secure Access. The cloud access broker has helped by providing a bridge between the user directory and functionality, allowing the system to enforce data control, compliance, and threat protection. This is good security practice as well.

How easy or difficult it is to manage Cisco Secure Access through the single cloud-managed console depends on who you talk to, but for me, with my experience, it has become very easy and really manageable. Much of the interface has been improved significantly, making management easier. The upgrade of the interface really has changed a lot, which makes it easier to remember.

Automation is something Cisco could improve for Cisco Secure Access. I have seen the way they have done this with SD-WAN, where you have automation of VPN through auto VPN tunneling and the creation of tunneling between SD-WAN. If Cisco could improve Cisco Secure Access in the same way, there should not be as much configuration needed, because companies are really keen when it comes to deployment these days. We need to automate deployment. If they could do that with Cisco Secure Access as well, especially with big branches, it would be great. I have worked with almost 200 branches, so configuration in all these branches is needed for security. If this could be integrated and automated exactly like the auto VPN that happens on SD-WAN, it would be excellent.

Regarding support, I do not know what happened to Cisco. I contact them, and the support has been a pain. The quality of support has dropped so drastically that it is not even funny.

I have been working with Cisco Secure Access since 2012.

Our deployment process is mixed. We are deploying for different clients, so it depends on what client they have.

Regarding support, I do not know what happened to Cisco. I contact them, and the support has been a pain. The quality of support has dropped so drastically that it is not even funny.

The setup process for Cisco Secure Access is very straightforward. Integrating with SD-WAN is really easy.

We are fighting internally with Zscaler because they are saying it is cheaper. Pricing is competitive between solutions. Palo Alto is coming very well as well. I am not sure if Cisco is also looking at that, but they are also coming with a lot of functionality within the Palo Alto space for the SASE function.

Cisco Secure Access does help me protect my company from threats like phishing and ransomware. The fact that Cisco Secure Access integrates Zero Trust, the secure gateway, and data loss integration does a lot to help with email security because of the integration with Cisco Web Gateway. Training users is also necessary because security involves users as well.

I am satisfied with the functionality of Cisco Secure Access. One of the areas I have not investigated much time on is the integration with the segmentation within the SASE solution. I have been doing it on my side, but I still need to understand how it integrates and how it can work instead of using the NAC solution. The ICE function could be integrated within Cisco Secure Access. I think that would be better because Cisco has integrated firewall as a service, so why not also integrate the NAC solution as a service in that platform as well.

I have given this review a rating of 9.

Public Cloud

Other

Cisco Secure Access is used as a security tool within the tenant as a firewall and serves as a cloud-delivered Zero Trust access platform. It is used for Microsoft Intune as conditional access, Global Secure Access, and from Defender for Cloud Apps, working behind before it.

Cisco Secure Access provides application-level access. Usually, it's full network access, but with this tool, application-level access can be given. It removes the dependency of VPN, and then user authentications are continuously based on identity, device, and risk, which is an add-on there.

The Zero Trust Network Access feature is being used.

Cisco AnyConnect is used as a VPN tool for SASE purposes.

The integration of CASB functionality for exposing shadow IT within the company is smooth. Technical skill and knowledge are needed to evaluate, analyze, and deep dive on those things. From the tool's response, it is very good, and there is visibility on everything that is needed or necessary.

The integration of Cisco Talos influences threat detection and response capabilities. The integration of Cisco Talos is similar to every Cisco Umbrella, and the experience has been smooth. The knowledge, their KB, and FAQs are very good, and their support is very good. When in trouble, readily available documents or information are accessible.

Managing Cisco Secure Access in a single cloud management console is moderate in difficulty. Technical skills or an understanding at a base level or moderate level are needed to make it work, configure, and integrate it. The difficulty level is somewhere between easy and difficult.

Cisco Secure Access has been used for one and a half years.

The product has been stable with no crashes or downtime so far, and the SLA is good.

Cisco Secure Access is scalable.

The technical support of Cisco is good and up to the mark.

Positive

Regarding deployment and installation, it is straightforward, but having basics is necessary.

No negative aspects have been observed so far; everything seems good. The review rating for this product is 9 out of 10.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure

Our main use case for Cisco Secure Access is remote access to the company.

The features of Cisco Secure Access that I like the most are the DART, which is an engine that inspects the hardware and software on the end client.

I appreciate that feature because I can ensure that the user is connecting from a company device or laptop with all security features up to date before they can connect to our local network.

The reason my company needs Cisco Secure Access is security. We want to improve our security posture and achieve zero trust.

There may be features that need further development, such as AI or integration with other products, but I cannot provide specific recommendations for improvement.

I would say that over the last 15 years, Cisco Secure Access is the best solution for remote access because I work with other companies as well, but Cisco Secure Access is the best one. It works and does not require improvement.

Cisco Secure Access has impacted our help desk ticket volume and end-user experience because sometimes users encounter issues. Since we have many features activated, users sometimes cannot connect or attempt to connect multiple times, which generates service desk tickets.

I have worked with many technical engineers for Cisco Secure Access, and I think they are very professional and provide a good experience.

I would rate them a 10 out of 10.

Positive

I never seriously considered migrating away from Cisco Secure Access.

The deployment process of Cisco Secure Access is very easy because there is a wizard with seven steps that allows you to configure it, and it works without complications.

The biggest return on investment for me when using Cisco Secure Access is that you purchase it once and it works. That is why it is the best solution. You do not need to open cases or invest additional time. You simply configure it and it works.

I do not have information about the pricing, setup cost, and licensing because I am not from the sales or pre-sales team. What I know is that we are also using Cisco Duo for authentication and have a good price for our company with more than 2,000 users.

If other companies are using another company's solution, such as Palo Alto or Check Point, they should try AnyConnect and will see that it works better than other products.

In my company, from the beginning, we have used only Cisco Secure Access with no other options. From the start, it was Secure Client and AnyConnect. I would rate this product a 10 out of 10.

I evaluate Cisco Secure Access's AI Access feature for providing deep visibility and control over AI applications as something we have just started using, with not much experience yet. The Canva features are in beta mode at the moment, so we are in the early stages.

Our customers use VPN as a Service (VPNasS) in Cisco Secure Access, as we are providing POC and offering that solution to some customers. It is new for them, particularly in India, where they are launching and promoting it now. We are trying to explain and educate customers on the differences between traditional VPN and Secure Access, and what the advantages are. We are doing all these initiatives while completing the POC as well.

The features mostly used in Cisco Secure Access by our customers include roaming clients, which is the major aspect because the clients are roaming around and accessing from anywhere. They need secure access to their private applications as well as public applications. Some applications are hosted in their own on-premises data center, others in their private cloud, and some in the public cloud. Therefore, they need to access all parts of their portfolio securely, and this is the main use case we propose.

I describe the performance and security levels provided by the Hybrid Private Access feature as solid; we are using a cloud firewall for security. The cloud firewall includes application filtering, DNS filtering, and everything is managed in the cloud, so we apply these conditions to ensure access to either public or private cloud.

Our customers use VPN as a Service (VPNasS) in Cisco Secure Access, as we are providing POC and offering that solution to some customers. It is new for them, particularly in India, where they are launching and promoting it now. We are trying to explain and educate customers on the differences between traditional VPN and Secure Access, and what the advantages are. We are doing all these initiatives while completing the POC as well.

In my opinion, Cisco Secure Access can be improved by further integrating different platforms into a single solution. They are slowly integrating all components into one solution, such as Secure Access, firewall, and Catalyst Center for switch management. The current challenge lies in managing multiple consoles, which adds complexity to the management of these platforms.

For future releases, I would like to see improvements in IDP integration, particularly regarding local user integration. There are some limitations because it is a cloud-based platform, and we need enhancements in the area of on-premises user integration.

I rate the technical support based on the individuals who connect; some provide correct solutions while others may take a lot of time.

On average, I would rate the technical service around seven, or perhaps seven point five out of ten.

There is indeed room for improvement regarding first-level support; they need to ensure that knowledgeable people are available.

Cisco Secure Access's initial setup is straightforward; it is a GUI-based cloud-managed deployment. If everything is configured correctly, we can complete the deployment within an hour, having all IPs and other elements ready.

Regarding affordability, I find the product to be reasonably priced, as we have access to a partner portal where we, as Cisco partners, can view GLP prices. From this portal, we can assess costing and budgetary considerations.

I am using Cisco Secure Access's Hybrid Private Access feature for varying the enforcement location for ZTNA private traffic.

I have integrated Cisco Identity Intelligence with Cisco Secure Access, where the IDP-related functionalities play a role. ISE is for centralized policy management, and within that context, it is not a major component; however, IDP integration is a significant part of Secure Access specifically for roaming clients.

The policy verification in Cisco Secure Access is very effective; since Secure Access is a cloud platform, we configure policies based on requirements and deploy them accordingly.

I would like to add that while the integration into one platform is important, security-wise, Cisco Secure Access is a good product. The complexity I see primarily relates to management, and they are gradually integrating towards a single platform, which is the only concern I have.

I believe Cisco Secure Access is the best option on the market at the moment; it is the right and recommended choice. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten overall.

My team's use case for Cisco Secure Access is that we currently have, or just had, a system with VDI connections, and it was quite difficult to handle because this VDI session is not optimized for video and telephony, especially Webex meetings.

We are now glad to have the opportunity to move to the SSE environment.

The feature of Cisco Secure Access that I appreciate the most is the ability to use Webex directly with the cloud.

We do not have to go through our on-premise system as we did before.

We can go directly from the home office workplaces to the cloud and we do not have to go through the on-premise infrastructure.

The benefit is that I can specify which traffic goes to the on-premise site and which traffic goes to the cloud.

Cisco Secure Access benefits my company considerably from my perspective, because we had some problems with integrating with the VDI infrastructure. In the end, it worked, mostly because of the thin client architecture we used. However, we were looking for something more powerful, better, and optimized for our environment, so we chose the SSE.

The deployment of Cisco Secure Access has impacted help desk ticket volume and the end-user experience. With the new SSE, we are rolling out new hardware. This is impacting the way our colleagues work with their electronic devices, and it is getting better now.

I am not using the AI assistant feature of Cisco Secure Access at this time.

I am not sure about using the VPNaaS in Cisco Secure Access, as in SSE, I am functioning as an end-user and I assist the guys who are implementing it. My part was mostly determining what ports are needed and what servers connect to on-premise and need to work with them. The implementation of this solution was quite easy.

I do not use ZTNA in Cisco Secure Access.

I have not used the Experience Insights feature of Cisco Secure Access, as I am not involved with it. It is just the underlying platform. I am implementing the voice features on it. I can speak from my opinions and insights on what I observed when implementing UC above the platform. It was quite good and acceptable.

I have not used the multi-organization management capability of Cisco Secure Access, so I cannot describe its usability and efficiency.

I come from a user perspective and user experience, because I am responsible for the UC clients which are working with the platform. From that, I can say it was quite easy to implement it and to bring the systems to work with SSE. However, I am not deeply involved in the capabilities of SSE.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for about two to three weeks for my daily work, and I have to admit that I am using it part-time because our colleagues have not fully migrated to Cisco Secure Client.

We are in the process of transitioning from one system with VDI to the SASE and SSE.

I have not had any interaction with the customer service or technical support of Cisco regarding Cisco Secure Access, as I support other things, and we did not have a problem with UC communication. It was no problem to implement it.

Negative

Before choosing Cisco Secure Access, I was using the VDI infrastructure I already discussed, which included thin clients at home and now includes laptops at home. From my perspective, it will be easier in the future.

My experience with the pricing, the setup costs, and the licensing of Cisco Secure Access is that from my perspective, we made quite a good deal with Cisco.

We were in the process of supporting the older hardware of our VDI infrastructure again and again, year after year. For us, it was more economical to move to SSE than to continue supporting the VDI infrastructure, so that was a good point for us to transition from VDI infrastructure to the SSE platform.

From my perspective, it was the right decision to move to that platform, as I expect the product to be ideal for having secure access to your network system, especially as we will see a transition from mostly on-premise to mostly cloud.

My relationship with Cisco is that my company is a long-time user of Cisco software and hardware. I have been working with Cisco since about 2003, and I am quite satisfied with dealing with Cisco.

There are many advantages. We have documentation, we have events such as this one, and we have partners in Germany that we can work with.

My advice to any companies considering Cisco Secure Access is to plan it. Talk to your Cisco partners and your Cisco representatives; I think it is worth it.

I rate this product overall as a 10.

We operate in the financial industry, specifically banking, where security is a primary concern when it comes to financial transactions. Our use case always prioritizes security requirements specific to the financial industry.

Cisco Secure Access offers exceptional ease of use as its most valuable feature. The single pane dashboard gives my team the ability to perform tasks on one dashboard and execute changes with a shorter duration. This is particularly beneficial because we have multiple layers of security when it comes to the data center, which helps us capture requirements in a single go.

Our security posture has improved significantly with Cisco Secure Access. Being in the financial industry, we undergo multiple audits from various regulatory bodies and government agencies. Cisco Secure Access helps us answer their questions and meet their requirements.

From a licensing perspective, there could be some enhancement. What I have observed from Cisco regarding licensing and pricing is that there are multiple license tiers, whether Essential, Advanced, or multiple layers of licenses. This creates confusion about which license type we need and which type this product requires. Some clarity or enhancement in this area could provide greater visibility and peace of mind.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for around five years.

Cisco Secure Access is reliable and helps us execute policies during runtime without any downtime.

Cisco Secure Access is scalable.

I did not evaluate any other solutions because we run most of our products from Cisco, which helps us achieve quick adoption.

I would not characterize Cisco Secure Access as easy or difficult to deploy. When it comes to security, you need to understand the application requirement, the flow, the requirement from the user's perspective, and how the data will flow. This understanding helps us gain visibility so we can deploy exact rules.

I do not currently use it as a VPN as a service. I plan to use it for the hybrid private access feature, but it has not been adopted yet.

We have started a proof of concept for using ZTNA because we were using other products from the Zero Trust perspective, but we are currently in the phase of running a proof of concept to roll out this functionality as well.

I would rate this product an overall score of eight out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

Other

Our main use cases for Cisco Secure Access are that we needed a secure DNS solution that kept people from doing things we did not want them to do. It kept them inside a box that we wanted them to be in, and that is what we got it for. We also needed logging capabilities.

The feature I appreciate the most about Cisco Secure Access is the logging. The logging provides the ability to see where people are going, what they are doing, and prove that they did in fact go there multiple times.

The features of Cisco Secure Access that benefited my organization are the access control mechanisms, what we block, what we allow, the ability to allow certain people, its connection to AD and groups and users, and again, logging.

My boss loves Cisco Secure Access. It finally gave him the ability to look at what people were doing and stop them from doing unwise things. It helps with VPNing out and the ability to block people stealing data. The DLP capability is also valuable.

I would like to see some compatibility with some other Cisco platforms such as Duo, among a couple of other things, so everything could work together well, rather than at odds with each other in maybe one platform. I know they are moving to Cisco Cloud Security from Umbrella. There is nothing really there except for Cisco Secure Access right now.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for the past year, and it was our first time using it.

I would assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access as having the worst thing about it being the VAs and their requirement of a full reinstall anytime something unusual happens to them if they go stale or any such thing.

Cisco Secure Access scales pretty well with my growing needs for my organization. It is secure DNS, and it scales.

Prior to adopting Cisco Secure Access, I used nothing.

I would describe my experience with deploying Cisco Secure Access as tedious. It is very tedious and specific for setting up. It does not do a good job in delineating the different areas of the application. Everything is thrown together. The breakdown of where to look for what is unclear. Primarily traffic steering and a couple of other aspects are just lost in the details. You have to go hunt for them every time.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing went pretty well. The Cisco representatives and the vendors that helped me got it through pretty quickly.

What led me to consider Cisco is that we are a Cisco shop. We have all switches, routers, and compute, pretty much everything that can be Cisco minus firewalls is Cisco. I have grown up on Cisco and it is usually easy to use.

I do not think Cisco Secure Access does a good job assessing the platform's ability to adapt to cyber threats using machine learning and behavioral analysis.

I do not think detailed analytics of my understanding of network vulnerabilities has anything to do with Cisco Secure Access either.

I have not used the Zero Trust Network Access feature, and it has not helped my security strategy. I would rate this review an 8.

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

All types of companies are a good fit for Cisco Secure Access, including manufacturing, education, finance, and all different types of customers we are having.

The majority of cases come on the regular switching and routing for Cisco Secure Access, and some cases do come on security aspects also when the network gets added features of security.

Some of our customers use VPN in Cisco Secure Access, VPN as a Service.

They are looking forward, definitely, in their transition from VPN to ZTNA.

Our customers have integrated Cisco Identity Intelligence with Cisco Secure Access.

The AI Access feature is quite important for providing deep visibility and control over AI applications, particularly considering these days AI is supporting the technologies. I feel it is important.

Identity management plays an important role wherever we are going for implementation of security measures influenced by this integration.

That should be very important for evaluation of the effectiveness of AI supply chain risk management.

Regarding the Experience Insights feature of Cisco Secure Access, I won't be able to tell you exactly because that is what my team usually handles.

There is nothing that I can exactly tell you for improvement for Cisco Secure Access.

Right now, I won't be able to really suggest additional features because that is something our implementation team will be able to tell better.

Improvement on the pricing will help in expanding the market for Cisco Secure Access and then it can be affordable to much more number of companies than what it is right now.

That is good. We have always valued Cisco for its good support.

That is good, definitely good when it comes to response time and first level support quality.

My team is there. They are doing it.

It has definitely made life easier, but again, security is something which is never close-ended. It has always evolved, and we have to keep evolving when we are considering security. What is security posture today which is okay, another year on, maybe that posture is not enough. And we have to be more reactive.

The pricing also always helps because the market is very competitive here, and it always plays a very major role. And quite often to remain competitive, we have to go into very deep discount mode, and then we can at least be in consideration. So price is always a consideration that way.

Improvement on the pricing will help in expanding the market for Cisco Secure Access and then it can be affordable to much more number of companies than what it is right now.

It is definitely one of the best options in the market for Cisco Secure Access, but there are competitions, definitely.

Cisco is very well poised and it helps us to build up cases with Cisco that way, because having its brand strength and its facilities and all, they could learn a lot from their competitors.

Our team has had some experience with Cisco Secure Access.

We are using it in our company and we recommend it to our customers.

We are offering that to our customers.

From that point of view, our guys are okay with deployments of Cisco Secure Access.

I will rate Cisco Secure Access at nine, definitely. I will keep some room to keep a challenge for oneself.

The awareness of Cisco Secure Access should be slightly more because Cisco is a default standard in the top-level companies or even banks and all. Cisco is the first choice. You can lower down, the presence is less because of the pricing factor and things like that.

Mostly through distribution, our customers buy Cisco Secure Access. We have got a good distribution channel here and we work quite closely that way.

I will give nine to Cisco Secure Access from my perspective.

They already are a market leader when it comes to the functionalities and the interface.

My overall review rating for Cisco Secure Access is nine out of ten.

My adventure with Cisco Secure Access started when I began my work, and my main use cases are focused on ensuring secure connectivity and protecting sensitive data.

My favorite feature of Cisco Secure Access is incredibly beneficial for a company, as it enhances security and user experience significantly.

Using ZTNA in Cisco Secure Access has positively affected my transition and my clients' transition to Zero Trust and least privilege principles, reinforcing the security posture.

The impact of Cisco Secure Access deployment on help desk ticket volume and the end-user experience has been remarkable, and I am using the AI assistant feature, which streamlines support. Cisco Secure Access has helped in preventing users from uploading sensitive and proprietary information to LLMs effectively, and I have heard from my clients regarding how they see it. They find that it works well and meets their security requirements.

In terms of usability and efficiency, the multi-organization management capability of Cisco Secure is robust. I believe Cisco Secure Access can be improved by changing some features, enhancing the user interface, and streamlining reporting.

I used VPNaaS in Cisco Secure Access, and it has greatly influenced my transition from VPN to ZTNA by simplifying secure access for users.

I evaluate the customer service and technical support of Cisco as consistently reliable.

I would describe the deployment experience of Cisco Secure Access as straightforward, without major challenges.

From my point of view, the biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Access is the significant reduction in security risks and improved operational efficiency.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Cisco Secure Access has been favorable.

I have worked with other tools that do similar things to Cisco Secure Access.

My advice to other companies thinking of deploying or getting Cisco Secure Access is to thoroughly assess their needs and goals, as it is crucial for maximizing the benefits. I gave this review a rating of 9.