Axis Security vs Cisco Secure Access comparison

Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Cisco are both solutions in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category. Hewlett Packard Enterprise is ranked #15 with an average rating of 10.0, while Cisco is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.4. Hewlett Packard Enterprise holds a 1.8% mindshare in SASE, compared to Cisco’s 3.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Hewlett Packard Enterprise users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Cisco users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

Axis Security and Cisco Secure Access compete in the secure access technology category. While Axis Security is recognized for its pricing and support, Cisco Secure Access is preferred for its robust features.

Features: Axis Security is known for advanced remote access, a zero-trust architecture, and efficiency in enterprise security needs. Cisco Secure Access provides integration capabilities, threat protection, and extensive API support, making it suitable for users seeking a comprehensive security suite.

Room for Improvement: Axis Security could enhance customization options, expand integration capabilities, and address customer service responsiveness. Cisco Secure Access users express a need for a streamlined setup process, reduced complexity, and faster deployment time.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Axis Security offers straightforward deployment, though some users find its customer service limited. Cisco Secure Access has a more complex deployment requiring skilled IT resources but is noted for robust customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Axis Security is valued for competitive setup costs and ROI benefits in secure access. Cisco Secure Access, despite a higher initial investment, is seen as offering justified long-term returns and comprehensive security value.

To learn more, read our detailed Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,644 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

iboss

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.3%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Axis Security is 1.8%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Access is 3.7%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Access	3.7%
iboss	3.3%
Axis Security	1.8%
Other	91.2%

Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.

Read full review

Robert Oglesbee

Solution Architect at Visionworks of America

Easy to deploy, improved reliability and performance of our connectivity, and greatly reduced costs

Atmos is good for securing infrastructure from end to end, detection and remediation of threats, but there may be a few features that could be added to make it a little easier for networking and security folks to analyze the traffic. There are bad actors out there and they may or may not show up through the tool. That's something they can add. They need to improve the networking and security tools a little in the troubleshooting and "bad-actor" areas to help us analyze security threats a little better. They have some things built in, but I would like to see more advanced tools. There are major vendors out there, and if you use their VPN connection that's not going to help you without buying one of their other products. So that's a similar type of situation. However, they do give you a little more bang for the buck when it comes to monitoring. So I can see an improvement there, in Atmos, in the future.

Read full review

reviewer2788500

Network Operations Engineer at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Secure access has unified zero trust and web protection while AI assistance automates tasks

From a feature perspective, I have not experienced any issues, drawbacks, or shortcomings. However, the cost of Cisco's products and licensing is high. My clients usually prefer cheaper options if possible. Mid-size or smaller businesses typically cannot afford Cisco Secure Access. Additionally, there is a steep learning curve, as it is very intensive. Someone with significant knowledge can work on it, but a new professional would have to spend considerable time to get accustomed to it. It is hard to find engineers who can work on it. Overall, we get what we pay for, as it is a pretty good feature and service. The pricing of Cisco's products and licensing is higher than competitors. If they could be more reasonable, that would help. The support offered for two years also has higher costs. Overall, the client's IT budget gets affected. It was challenging to learn because, as mentioned, it has a significant learning curve and requires considerable training to become proficient.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."

"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."

"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."

"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."

"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."

"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."

More iboss pros

"The entire suite and the entire ZTNA process are very valuable."

"The most valuable part so far has been Axis Security's ability to create identity connections to various servers, allowing users to access them. By doing so, we've managed to replace any old or existing VPN access with Axis Security. We are slowly but surely getting rid of our traditional VPN."

"I rate Axis Security ten out of ten."

"The most valuable aspect is its ability to restrict unauthorized access, ensuring that only approved devices can connect to the network. T"

"I would give it an A-plus for securing access to our applications, devices, and network. It does an extremely good job. Our security folks have analyzed it and tried to find loopholes, but they found none."

"The way the access connectors work is valuable."

"What I appreciate about Cisco is that everything they do is precise and works well without any issues."

"The primary benefit is being able to see exactly where a connection or person is getting blocked, and then if we can allow it to either that person by their credentials, MAC address, or using the agent on their laptop, it becomes easier to troubleshoot."

"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."

"ROI with Cisco Secure Access is quite good because it reduces hardware dependencies and offers many features."

"I am happy with the performance and security levels it provides, as I feel it is a robust and high-performing product with both the clientless and the client aspects."

"The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Access is the secure web gateway, which provides the secure edge."

"I find Cisco Secure Access pretty interesting."

"Based on ROI, Cisco Secure Access is worth the investment, as it is a core security product that allows customers to measure their ROI effectively."

More Cisco Secure Access pros

Cons

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

"I have heard they are doing DDoS filtering, but I am not certain if they are implementing it correctly."

"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."

"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."

"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."

"The endpoint-type solution is an area that needs some improvement."

"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."

"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."

More iboss cons

"I would like more detailed logging in the Axis Security interface."

"They need to improve the networking and security tools a little in the troubleshooting and 'bad-actor' areas to help us analyze security threats a little better. They have some things built-in, but I would like to see more advanced tools."

"I would appreciate more automated learning capabilities or increased integration with other security tools, allowing us to establish automation."

"There should be a notification alarm with geofencing."

"I would like more statistics about what's going on in terms of usage. There is little-to-no usage reporting. That's one thing we've requested, and I think they're working on it."

"The support team should be more skilled in offering assistance."

"My experience with customer support for Cisco Secure Access has been okay, but it is not very fast."

"The Talos database is insufficient because Cisco Secure Access web gateway database is not big enough to hold every URL, leading to numerous problems with URLs not being categorized correctly and a slow turnaround for recategorization requests."

"Cisco Secure Access can be improved with more integration; the more integrations, the better. There are always third-party products that you might have, such as Carbon Black."

"In terms of negative aspects of Cisco Secure Access, it is not easy to manage everything in Cisco products."

"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."

"The license model can be simplified; it is a bit tricky to understand exactly which licenses you need."

"If the FTD devices themselves, the Firepower Threat Detection system, those are the firewalls themselves, the individual appliances, weren't so tightly coupled to FMC, I'd probably appreciate them as a product more."

"Cisco Secure Access can be improved by developing a portal to control all tools together, which is the feature I want most as we are on this journey and learning about it."

More Cisco Secure Access cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"The pricing is quite fair. It's better than what we gave up, which was Cisco AnyConnect."

"The pricing is very competitive from what I've seen."

"The pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access have been very competitive compared to other platforms. I believe that if Cisco continues to improve costs or offers something similar to a Cisco credit, it would attract more customers."

"It is confusing. When you look at the prices, you have different licensing and years of licensing that you have to purchase. Additionally, it's unclear what service you get from those licenses regarding end-user support. We have a representative who has to walk me through it every time."

"For what you get, it's a fair price in comparison to other products."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

10%

Retailer

Comms Service Provider

University

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	27
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	34

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Axis Security?

Axis Security is affordable. While I cannot provide financial specifics, we have never had complaints about pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Axis Security?

There should be a notification alarm with geofencing. When a person is at the gate, a notification alarm should alert...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Axis Security?

We monitor access for individuals who log in and out, as there are codes we log in with. The code is generated by an ...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Access?

Pricing for Cisco Secure Access has been very reasonable in the context of the entire world of SASE solutions. Setup ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?

Our main use case for Cisco Secure Access is providing security for hybrid and mobile workforces. One of the big chal...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Secure Access?

One of the things about policy verification is with Cisco Secure Access and modern security products in general, poli...

See all answers

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Lightspeed Filter vs iboss

Compared 3% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Axis Security

Compared 15% of the time

Cisco Security Cloud vs Axis Security

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs Axis Security

Compared 7% of the time

FortiSASE vs Axis Security

Compared 5% of the time

Okta Platform vs Axis Security

Compared 2% of the time

More Axis Security Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 16% of the time

FortiSASE vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

Netskope vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 6% of the time

Barracuda SecureEdge vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 3% of the time

More Cisco Secure Access Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

June 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Axis Security

June 2026

Download Axis Security product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access

June 2026

Download Cisco Secure Access product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Axis Security provides secure and seamless access to cloud infrastructures with features that support both modern and legacy applications, enhancing connectivity and performance.

As a leader in secure connectivity, Axis Security simplifies access management with its easy deployment and configuration. It integrates directly with Okta for single sign-on and replaces traditional VPNs, ensuring trust for access requests while restricting unauthorized access. Its interface combines Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) and secure web gateway functions into one, offering a unified approach for managing secure connections across platforms including Azure, AWS, and Google. Users find its reporting capabilities beneficial for access analysis, supporting multiple protocols to establish secure connections effortlessly.

What are the most important features of Axis Security?

Easy Deployment and Configuration: Streamlines access management.
Secure Connectivity: Direct integration with cloud providers like Azure, AWS, Google.
Single-pane Interface: Combines ZTNA and secure web gateway functions.
Single Sign-On: Okta integration enhances seamless access.
Access Analysis: Comprehensive reporting features aid security insights.

What benefits or ROI should users look for?

Enhanced Security: Replaces VPNs and restricts unauthorized access.
Improved Performance: Reduces latency with seamless global infrastructure access.
Protocol Support: Supports multiple protocols for flexible connectivity.

In the biopharma industry, Axis Security enables entities to manage infrastructure access, safeguarding proprietary data and meeting compliance. Insurance subsidiaries use it to monitor access across retail environments, while cloud deployments help secure network devices against unauthorized access and manage code generation for site monitoring and authentication.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise

Cisco Secure Access is a comprehensive Security Service Edge (SSE) solution (a key component of a SASE solution) that addresses the complexities of securing a hybrid enterprise. Cloud-delivered and grounded in zero trust, it delivers a unique blend of user simplicity and IT efficiency for frictionless, secure access to all applications—SaaS (with gen AI), private apps, and the internet—regardless of user location or device. Secure Access protects users, data, and devices against relentless, sophisticated, and constantly evolving threats including AI-driven attacks and identity breaches.

Provides all core SSE components (ZTNA, SWG, CASB, and FWaaS) plus extended capabilities.

Includes VPN-as-a-Service (VPNaaS), data loss prevention (DLP), AI Assistant, visibility/control/guardrails for generative AI use, digital experience monitoring (DEM), reserved IP, remote browser isolation (RBI), DNS-layer security, flexible security enforcement (in cloud or on-premises), policy verification, and more.
Protects users as they seamlessly access resources and apps with no extra steps needed, regardless of protocol, port, or level of customization
Simplifies IT operations through a single client, single dashboard, single license, and unified policies.
Lowers risk with least privilege, granular controls backed with unmatched threat intelligence of Cisco Talos.
Eases interoperability with other products from Cisco and third-party vendors with common administrative controls, data structures, and policy management.

Robust integrations

Integrates with Cisco Identity Intelligence to protect against the startling increase in identity-based attacks.
Integrates with many SAML Identity Providers (IDPs) such as AD, Azure AD, Okta, Ping, etc.
Integrates with Cisco offerings including SD-WAN, Splunk, XDR, Thousand Eyes, third party technologies such as Menlo RBI, Chrome Enterprise Browser, and AppOmni for SSPM.

Cisco

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.

Cardenas Markets, Armis, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Visionworks

1. IBM 2. Microsoft 3. Amazon 4. Google 5. Apple 6. Cisco Systems 7. Oracle 8. Intel 9. HP Inc. 10. Dell Technologies 11. Verizon Communications 12. AT&T 13. Comcast 14. T-Mobile 15. Sprint 16. Vodafone 17. Orange 18. BT Group 19. Deutsche Telekom 20. Telefonica 21. Nokia 22. Ericsson 23. Samsung Electronics 24. Sony 25. Panasonic 26. LG Electronics 27. Siemens 28. General Electric 29. Ford Motor Company 30. General Motors 31. Toyota Motor Corporation 32. Volkswagen Group

Buyer's Guide

Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access

June 2026

Free Report: Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access

Find out what your peers are saying about Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access report.

See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors, best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors, and best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors.

We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.