No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) vs Netskope Private Access comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Sponsored
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
Cisco Secure Client (includ...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
SSL VPN (3rd), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (6th), Cisco Security Portfolio (5th)
Netskope Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
15th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.7%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is 2.8%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 2.4%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
iboss3.7%
Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect)2.8%
Netskope Private Access2.4%
Other91.1%
ZTNA as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
AS
Manager - Projects at airtel
Offers work-from-anywhere flexibility but navigates occasional proxy confusion
The analytics I downloaded from your site as a free download did not carry the information that was actually required. I was looking at the market segmentation and market share, along with some USPs which differentiated them from each other. The free download had two issues: many things were repetitive, and it was designed to not release any relevant information. Only headers were present, so I was not able to determine whether the final report would be worthwhile. I have not worked with enterprise tools that I could share feedback on for website publication. I see benefits from using Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect). However, I would not recommend it because future adoptions will be towards Zscaler, as SSC is a better model than VPN. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 7.
Prathamesh Samant - PeerSpot reviewer
Presales Manager at a manufacturing company with 201-500 employees
Has ensured secure remote access through real-time device checks and policy controls
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support, it is quite easy to integrate. Wherever customization is needed, it depends on the openness of the application being integrated with. If the other application has an open architecture where you have easy API integrations, then it becomes easier. However, in some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope. They can introduce the DLP feature for Netskope Private Access. Zscaler has that DLP feature. It is in their roadmap, but currently, they don't have it. If they have data protection or data loss prevention within their NPA, that would be a significant advantage.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"The solution works very well. You just click and it's working."
"You don't have to think about it very much. It just works."
"Support does solve our issues."
"The solution is very easy to use and set up."
"Cisco Secure Network Analytics has impacted our organization by securing each endpoint device properly through VPN usage, enabling us to understand what end users are using and what they are trying to access, and filling the gap between the monitoring and management side by allowing us to check end user activity clearly from the Cisco Secure Network Analytics console."
"The functions in Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) that I have found most valuable are that it is a connection tool that connects and has redundancy, which is a good thing."
"This product is highly secure and easy to use."
"For the most part, we've been very happy with the solution and its capabilities."
"It is a stable solution."
"The product's scalability is good."
"We can block and alert the ports and allow the public traffic software in our environment."
"In the VPN scenario, what was happening, the user would get back to the complete source. But in NPA, the application will go to the user. There is an outbound connection. There is no inbound. Storage providers are also not there. It's the best feature because it is the replacement of the VPN."
"They do one software or one platform; they are the leading CASBY platform in the world, and what they can do, nobody can do."
"In the firewall, we don't have a user-based policies list, and we can't create them. Netskope helps us to create user-based policies. For example, if there are specific teams like HR or more than nine teams, and we want logs from access over particular URLs, and we don't want to allow that specific URL for certain users, we can create these policies in Netskope. It's handy, easy to use for new users, and has a cool GUI interface. We can create multiple policies, and as for the proxy, it's a leading solution."
"The initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."
"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
 

Cons

"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."
"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."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"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."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"Its pricing could be better."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is somewhat expensive compared to others such as Fortinet or Palo Alto, which provide free VPN when the firewall is purchased."
"Overall, I prefer Microsoft's tech support because I noticed that Cisco does not provide enough of it."
"It should autodetect or monitor it, when I am in the office it goes to the network in the office, or when I'm not at the office, it automatically activates my VPN connection."
"When using Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client when my laptop goes into sleep mode the VPN wants me to enter the password again. I should not have to enter the information again. If the laptop is on and it is not switched off, the password should be in the VPN saved and secured."
"The support could be more proactive in their recommendations. I noticed that the Cisco support agents tend to leave customers to do what they need to do in many ways, and you can choose how you want to do it. However, it would be great if they could proactively be involved in best practices and let other customers know how most people are doing it."
"However, when different configurations need to be completed, we need to get in touch with Cisco Technical Assistance Center because we don't have enough documentation on the website."
"All Cisco equipment tends to be expensive compared to newer options from other vendors."
"This solution doesn't address the seal of trust as a concept for a traditional VPN clients. I think that it is a dying product."
"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."
"The major problem that we are facing is if we deploy Netskope on the server level or if we get a new server in the EMEA factor, it will affect all the machines. Recently, this has caused us to fail some reviews."
"Netskope Private Access could improve by enhancing visibility of user performance and application performance. It should also integrate wider DLP and inspection engines on private access traffic."
"Netskope Private Access allows mapping only one DNS server. If a user uses a secondary DNS on-premises, Netskope fails to disconnect them. This is an issue that needs to be addressed."
"Netskope detects certain data or contents, but there are some limitations on how we can customize those policies for DLP."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"The solution needs to develop faster features. Its interoperability feature is not working. It takes six months to one year for any product to implement the improvements. However, the process should be faster to implement the changes quickly."
"The main challenge we are facing across various Trust Network Access (TNA) technologies, including Netskope, is their inability to support broadcast applications or those relying on broadcasting protocols."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"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."
"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 not a free solution and the user needs to buy license."
"We are in the North African region, and Cisco products are expensive for us. On a scale from one to ten with one being very affordable and ten being expensive, I'd rate the price at eight."
"The pricing depends on the requirement, so proper planning and an RF analysis help to properly size the solution and get the best pricing."
"The initial cost is the ASA and other items, but after that, it is relatively inexpensive."
"The solution is reasonably priced and costs $600 for a five-year license in our scenario."
"Sometimes there is a problem with the number of licenses for the end-user. The number of concurrent users is limited due to a valid license."
"The licensing costs are reasonable."
"I would rate the pricing for the license of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client around four to five out of ten. It's not the cheapest option, but it's also not overly expensive."
"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."
"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."
"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."
"It is not the most expensive option, being more affordable than Zscaler, but it's also not the most budget-friendly choice available."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"It is significantly cost-effective compared to its contenders."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Construction Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise49
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
I think iboss could be improved by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible, and simplifying troubl...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
I use iboss as a cloud-based secure web gateway to provide secure internet access, web filtering, and protect remote ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
My experience with iboss's pricing structure, setup cost, and licensing model has been positive, straightforward, and...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is somewhat expensive compared to others such as Fortinet or Palo Alto, wh...
What needs improvement with Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
There are no features that I wish Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) had that it does not currently provide. ...
What is your primary use case for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
I primarily use Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) for VPN connections and network-related activities. We hav...
What needs improvement with Netskope Private Access?
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support...
What is your primary use case for Netskope Private Access?
For secure remote access for people who are working out of the office, remotely, or traveling, my clients mostly use ...
What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Private Access?
I work with a system integrator, and nowadays, we have all these solutions in our portfolio for our customers. At tha...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client
No data available
 

Overview

 

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.
MST, Molina Healthcare, Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers, Arup, New South Wales Rural FireService
Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) vs. Netskope Private Access and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.