Cisco Secure Access vs NetFoundry Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Cisco and NetFoundry are both solutions in the ZTNA category. Cisco is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.5, while NetFoundry is ranked #37. Additionally, 100% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NetFoundry users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 22, 2026

NetFoundry Platform and Cisco Secure Access compete in the network solution domain. Cisco Secure Access often holds an advantage with a broader feature set, while NetFoundry Platform is beneficial for cost and implementation support.

Features: NetFoundry Platform highlights a zero-trust model, simplified network management, and cost-effective security. Cisco Secure Access provides extensive security protocols, robust connectivity options, and a wide range of functionalities, offering a more comprehensive feature set.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: NetFoundry Platform is recognized for a fast setup process and proactive customer support that facilitates a smooth transition. Cisco Secure Access involves a more complex setup but gains from an extensive support infrastructure, ensuring an effective deployment model.

Pricing and ROI: NetFoundry Platform is noted for its lower initial setup cost, promising a solid ROI with efficient operations. Cisco Secure Access requires a higher upfront investment, potentially leading to a worthwhile ROI with its expansive functionality and security advantages for enterprises seeking comprehensive solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Secure Access vs. NetFoundry Platform Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access vs. NetFoundry Platform

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,769 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

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

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

Sureshot

Cybersecurity Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Easy to set up, stable, and helpful for integrating the systems that require a fast and reliable connection

They can provide hardware for specific use cases because some of the NetFoundry solutions don't have the hardware. Currently, they're more into software, but some of the clients want a single brand instead of having multiple vendors. So, if they can offer hardware as well, it would be good. If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good. Their technical support can be improved. There should be a better handover of a case from one support person to another.

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

"I recommend iboss for organizations looking for strong cloud-based web security and centralized access control."

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

"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."

"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."

"The students were always protected, and the content filtering worked very well, seeming to work better than other products we had tried previously."

"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."

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

More iboss pros

"The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Access is the possibility to work from anywhere, along with the posture for the host, so the check on the posture."

"It works well. It hasn't broken. While I don't know enough about all the features yet, it hasn't caused us any problems."

"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."

"Giving the customer peace of mind has been one of the biggest benefits we have seen, and my security team probably knows more details on my side."

"The feature of Cisco Secure Access I appreciate the most is the DNS functionality."

"The best feature that Cisco Secure Access offers is a single platform where DNS security, ZTNA, and everything are in one place, all managed through a single cloud dashboard."

"Any tool that provides telemetry through logging is a particularly good fit for us because we have to really automate our monitoring."

"Cisco Secure Access has definitely helped our organization, cutting incident response time at least in half and giving us analytics that let us quickly identify devices and users so everything from headquarters contacting the base to the on-site tech removing a rogue device from the classroom network is much quicker."

More Cisco Secure Access pros

"The price is very reasonable compared to others and the cloud service is free."

"It is quite stable; we don't have a problem, and in terms of reliability, we haven't encountered or heard of any issues from our customers."

"The Network as a Service that they offer is most valuable."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is in the cloud."

Cons

"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."

"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."

"The reporting feature needs improvement."

"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."

"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."

"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."

"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, and that is where in 2025 we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform."

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."

More iboss cons

"I received support from the team for Cisco Secure Access related to web services. There were occasional delays of up to two working days."

"Comparing Cisco Secure Access to something like Cloudflare One, in the future the cost can come down."

"Having been associated with Cisco for more than fifteen to twenty years, I find it increasingly difficult to get tech support these days. Although Cisco is reliable, the process to raise a support ticket has become more complex, requiring specific user accounts and access to specialized platforms."

"The ease of managing Cisco Secure Access is quite challenging; it is not user-friendly, and we have to involve too much time to review the information available in the dashboard, which can be confusing."

"I would describe my experience deploying Cisco Secure Access as working well, though we are hitting bugs."

"My advice to another organization considering using Cisco Secure Access is that there is a reason the cost is high, because of the security, but other than that, that is really it."

"There is a need for improved global coverage since the service relies on the cloud provider's data centers."

"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."

More Cisco Secure Access cons

"The solution could provide internet access control."

"If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

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

"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."

"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."

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

"I don't have the cost, but in terms of its management viability, it is acceptable for most of our clients. It seems quite fair."

"The price is very reasonable compared to others and the cloud service is free."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Outsourcing Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	15

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	29
Midsize Enterprise	15
Large Enterprise	41

No data available

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

iboss could be improved by making the dashboard more user-friendly, providing more detailed real-time alerts, and imp...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

iboss is primarily used for cloud security, helping to protect users when they access websites and cloud applications...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

The pricing and licensing for iboss were reasonable for the security features. The setup costs were manageable, thoug...

See all answers

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

In my experience with the Experience Insights feature or Digital Experience Monitoring of Cisco Secure Access, Thousa...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?

We use Cisco SD-WAN in our own company for our own needs, and we are also selling this to our customers while perform...

See all answers

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

Currently, AI Supply Chain Risk Management is not really an issue for us today. I would rate Cisco Secure Access a se...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs iboss

Compared 3% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 10% of the time

FortiSASE vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 8% of the time

Netskope vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 7% of the time

Secure Access – DNS Defense vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 5% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 2% of the time

More Cisco Secure Access Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs NetFoundry Platform

Compared 15% of the time

VMware VeloCloud SD-WAN vs NetFoundry Platform

Compared 14% of the time

Zscaler B2B vs NetFoundry Platform

Compared 7% of the time

Cloudflare One vs NetFoundry Platform

Compared 5% of the time

Okta Platform vs NetFoundry Platform

Compared 3% of the time

More NetFoundry Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

October 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access

October 2026

Download Cisco Secure Access product report

Buyer's Guide

ZTNA as a Service

October 2026

Download NetFoundry Platform product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

NetFoundry Edge Router

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

iboss

Demo not available

Cisco

NetFoundry

Overview

iboss is the Zero Trust SASE platform that gives organizations complete visibility and governance over their AI, data, and applications through one unified platform, one console, one policy engine, and one data lake.

Your endpoints may already stop malware. Your data and application activity can still be invisible. iboss decrypts and understands every connection, then turns that signal into answers security leaders can act on.

The platform leads with three capabilities in this order: AI Security and Visibility, Data Security and Visibility, and App Visibility and Control. Zero Trust Network Access, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN sit underneath as the access fabric that carries those three. Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

- AI Security and Visibility: conversation capture, shadow-AI discovery, AI DLP, and agent governance across Claude, Co-Work, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok, and emerging services.

- Data Security and Visibility: full SSL/TLS decryption, deep content inspection, MIP label compliance, and one-click compliance reporting.

- App Visibility and Control: signatureless CASB, dual risk scoring, in-app controls, and SSPM for major SaaS.

- Containerized Zero Trust SASE: dedicated containers, isolated SSL keys, one console, one policy engine, one data lake.

- Access fabric: ZTNA, VPN replacement, and SD-WAN under the same platform.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

- Complete visibility over AI, data, and applications from one platform instead of separate point tools.

- Encrypted traffic is inspected by default so data decisions use content and context together.

- Shadow SaaS and new web tools appear as they are used, with enforceable controls in one console.

- Native data sovereignty through dedicated containers, in-region inspection, and per-customer SSL key custody.

- Scale proven in published materials: 10M+ users, 100+ countries, 150B+ transactions, 2.5B+ threats blocked.

Economic buyers are CISOs, CIOs, and VPs of Security. Champions include security architects, network and infrastructure leaders, SecOps, and GRC. Primary segments: enterprise and business, financial services, government (including FedRAMP Gov Cloud), healthcare, manufacturing, legal and professional services, retail and hospitality, and MSP/MSSP partners. Education, including K-12, is one vertical among these.

iboss

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

NetFoundry is the leader in Zero Trust Workload Connectivity, trusted to securely connect enterprise’s most critical workloads, within and across any environment.

As the only identity-first fabric for every AI, API, site, container, and machine interaction, NetFoundry customers deploy their workloads with greater speed, security and scalability.

Its Identity-First Reachability™ eliminates the reachable attack surface that attackers exploit and defenders struggle to secure, by removing open inbound ports, VPNs and firewall rule changes. By design, it enables security to adapt to the environment, not force the environment to adapt to security, so teams can secure one workload at a time without the high cost of firewall management or redesigning the network.

Customers use NetFoundry to:

Govern AI agent, model and tool access to cut risks, costs, and time to deploy.
Stop lateral movement through microsegmentation
Protect difficult to patch assets and crown jewel systems with a compensating control
Securely connect any system (IT/OT/IoT) or API wherever it operates

Founded by the inventors and maintainers of OpenZiti, the world’s most widely used open source Zero Trust platform, NetFoundry secures billions of sessions for critical infrastructure on three continents and supports Fortune 10 companies across regulated industries including healthcare, financial services, and energy.

NetFoundry

Sample Customers

Trusted by global enterprises and government agencies.

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

Ominimo, Rhapsody, TZ, LVT, CERM, Digibee

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access vs. NetFoundry Platform

September 2026

Free Report: Cisco Secure Access vs. NetFoundry Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Access vs. NetFoundry Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cisco Secure Access vs. NetFoundry Platform report.

See our list of best ZTNA vendors and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.

We monitor all ZTNA 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.