Cisco Secure Access Reviews

My main use cases for Cisco Secure Access are firewalls between our IT and OT networks and VPN access to our OT network. For the most part, I am strictly using Cisco Secure Access as a next-gen firewall, using it for deep packet inspection visibility, but mostly for VPN remote access.

The integration has been really good for my identity management and security measures. There have been some difficulties at times, but we have been able to get it to work.

I would describe my multi-organization management capability of Cisco Secure Access as having its ups and downs. There are times it feels difficult to navigate and get things configured, but that is coming from a CLI perspective. I can see improvements from the previous versions and generations. It is getting better. I think I just need to get acclimated to it and get used to it.

For us on the OT side, Cisco Secure Access has been good in scaling with the growing needs of my organization.

I am not sure which features of Cisco Secure Access I appreciate the most.

I have not used the policy verification feature of Cisco Secure Access to help reduce policy misconfigurations.

I am not certain how Cisco Secure Access can be improved or what additional features should be included in the next release.

My experience with deploying Cisco Secure Access has faced a few challenges, I believe, just as with policy configurations. That is getting familiar with the interfaces and other aspects. I think these are things that I was able to work through.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for approximately three to five years.

I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues with Cisco Secure Access, so I assess its stability and reliability as good.

I have not expanded usage of Cisco Secure Access significantly. Only client user-wise have I expanded, but not infrastructure-wise.

I would rate my customer service and technical support for Cisco Secure Access a five out of five. I give them a ten on a scale from one being the worst to ten being the best because they are very responsive.

Prior to adopting Cisco Secure Access, I was not using another solution to address similar needs.

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

I did not upgrade from Umbrella to Cisco Secure Access.

I have seen a return on investment with Cisco Secure Access.

I have always been a Cisco shop and did not consider other solutions before selecting Cisco Secure Access.

My advice to another organization considering using Cisco Secure Access is to do your homework. I would rate this review a nine out of ten.

Cisco Secure Access is used primarily to navigate the internet while protecting users when they visit dangerous sites.

The protection feature is what I appreciate most about Cisco Secure Access, and we use it together with other tools while implementing Cisco Secure Access with SD-WAN.

The benefit I have experienced from Cisco Secure Access' identity-based security measures in my organization is the ability to control the profiles.

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.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for one year since we migrated from Umbrella.

I assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access as top-notch, and I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues because we built the solution and performed the tests step-by-step. When we encountered a small issue, Cisco was with us and provided the solution very quickly.

I would rate the customer support and tech assistance as a 10.

Before using Cisco Secure Access, I considered Umbrella and then moved to Cisco Secure Access.

My experience with deploying Cisco Secure Access was easy because Cisco worked with us through the process.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been somewhat unclear, but we can certainly improve on that aspect.

The benefit I have experienced from Cisco Secure Access' identity-based security measures in my organization is the ability to control the profiles.

The protection feature is what I appreciate most about Cisco Secure Access, and we use it together with other tools while implementing Cisco Secure Access with SD-WAN.

I have used the Zero Trust Network Access feature, but we use it directly on the firewalls rather than through Cisco Secure Access.

Granular access controls have helped in managing user permissions by allowing some users to have access to YouTube for trainings and specific videos while other users do not have this kind of access.

To measure the impact of detailed analytics on my understanding of network vulnerabilities, we use it together with scans to find vulnerabilities and threats and to have a fast solution to address them. We use it together with Cisco DNA, for example, and when we receive documentation about vulnerabilities, the team sends it to us and we can treat it directly and upgrade or take the necessary steps to avoid this kind of vulnerability.

I rated this review a 10 overall.

Our main use cases for Cisco Secure Access are security and managing access.

Zero Trust Network Access has helped my organization in securing standard applications because it's mandated to have it. It provides peace of mind knowing that we have that deployed in our network.

Cisco Secure Access's ability to provide secure access via standard HTTP2, and optionally, QUIC protocol is good. It complies with the new standards.

The impact of Cisco Secure Access on protecting my organization from phishing and ransomware threats has been good so far. We've been doing well with no threats. 

The features of Cisco Secure Access that I most prefer are easy management or manageability, and overall security. Cisco Secure Access has benefited my organization by allowing people to connect 24/7, ensuring reliability. Managing Cisco Secure Access through its single cloud-managed console is easy.

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. 

I've been using Cisco Secure Access for a few years now. They changed the name, though I'm not certain when the name change occurred. I would estimate at least a few years of usage.

I would assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access as overall good. I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues.

Cisco Secure Access scales with the growing needs of my organization. It adapts each year as more people and devices are getting connected. The process of increasing usage is smooth.

I would rate them an eight out of ten because it's always hard to get very good resources immediately. It always takes escalations to get someone who really knows how to help out. I feel good about the customer service.

Positive

We switched from Palo Alto.

I was not a part of the deployment.

We have seen ROI with Cisco Secure Access. We had to switch from a different product, and there was a significant cost reduction. We're able to get many of the licenses down compared to the previous product that we used. We had many more licenses before moving to Cisco Secure Access.

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

We are, in general, a Cisco shop. We went for it because it integrates with the rest of the Cisco products that we have. We didn't consider other solutions.

My advice to other organizations considering Cisco Secure Access is that they should definitely give it a try. It's overall a good product. If you have other Cisco products, it integrates efficiently, and if you need any visibility or easy manageability, it's a very good product. 

Cisco Secure Access overall is a great product. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

My main use case for Cisco Secure Access is for one client, where I deployed DNS security. Previously, Cisco DNS security was part of Umbrella; now, it has been moved to Cisco Secure Access. I implemented DNS security, which provided the client with cloud-based DNS security and intelligent proxy features, so they are protected from day-zero attacks with policy management in place. That was one use case for Cisco Secure Access, and for another client, I have recently deployed ZTNA using Cisco Duo MFA.

For a specific example of how I used Cisco Secure Access for one of these clients, I will provide the example of one client where I deployed ZTNA through MFA. The client has around 1500 users working in a hybrid environment, so connecting every user on the VPN, whether hardware-hosted, VM-hosted, or anywhere else, causes unnecessary burden. SASE is the best use case of Cisco Secure Access in the hybrid environment, where if users want to access any of their private applications, they connect to Cisco Secure Cloud. From the cloud, the traffic is tunneled, providing zero-trust access and requiring MFA to access any internal application. This way, since it is cloud-based security, the routing and everything is taken care of in the cloud, avoiding dependency on hardware infrastructure or overusing the link in the data center itself.

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.

Having everything in a single platform and dashboard has made things easier for me and my clients because everything is available for checking or troubleshooting.

Cisco Secure Access has positively impacted my organization because we are Cisco preferred partners. We deploy everything for our clients, so it is not just about deploying it in our organization. Since we are a preferred partner, many clients requiring Cisco Secure Access are routed to us from Cisco.

After deploying Cisco Secure Access, I received specific positive outcomes and feedback from my clients. For the use case concerning DNS security over the last three months, their AD integration with Cisco Secure Access allows them to create user-based policies for DNS security based on identity and username. They also receive a dashboard to monitor reports on threats and everything online in the cloud. The customer is very happy that they are able to overview their organization, seeing the number of users utilizing maximum applications, the top talkers, and everything.

Cisco Secure Access has greatly impacted protecting my organization and clients from threats such as phishing and ransomware. Because it has ZTNA and is cloud-based with VMs deployed inside the network, it creates best practice tunnels required for accessing applications from day one. Thus, we can deploy with peace of mind without juggling best practices or opening only specific ports.

Cisco Secure Access can be improved by providing information about the location of the PoPs where users are connected. The guidelines in KSA say it is mandatory for the PoPs to be regional, similar to how Fortinet SASE discloses its PoP locations.

In terms of needed improvements around documentation and support, the documentation has been good for me. Since I deployed for the first time, I went through Cisco documents, which helped me a lot, and their program on the T-Cloud labs also provided great support. Completing the lab gave me the confidence to deploy for the customer. The documentation and the labs provided by Cisco are very good.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for the last six months.

For others looking into using Cisco Secure Access, my advice is that it is a good solution and they should experience it.

I chose eight out of ten primarily due to only the PoP presence. I would rate the ease of managing Cisco Secure Access through its single cloud-managed console an eight.

In my experience, it is easy to navigate and manage everything from the console, but compared to the FortiGate SASE platform, FortiGate has a unified platform for all their products, while Cisco has each platform operating differently.

I use the Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) feature of Cisco Secure Access, and it is a great feature. We do not need to worry about the security of accessing applications from outside the environment. With ZTNA, each application access requires authentication, which is a truly great feature.

This ZTNA approach has positively changed my client's security posture, and there are no significant challenges or surprises. I rate this product eight out of ten.

I use Cisco Secure Access for VPN resources in my day-to-day work to implement the VPN tunnel to the data center.

The best features Cisco Secure Access offers include stability. With 4,000 people using it and not many tickets, Cisco Secure Access has positively impacted my organization by providing stable VPN access to the data center.

This stability has led to measurable outcomes, as we have fewer tickets.

Cisco Secure Access is good, and I feel nothing more is needed for improvement. I chose a rating of nine out of ten because of the zero downtime, but that is nearly not possible, and I cannot tell you what to do better.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for eight years.

Cisco Secure Access is good, and I feel nothing more is needed for improvement.

With 4,000 people using it and not many tickets, Cisco Secure Access has positively impacted my organization by providing stable VPN access to the data center.

I will contact our partner manager if the vendor has any questions or comments about my review.

Neutral

We do use VPNs in Cisco Secure Access, and we already have Zero Trust, which has influenced our transition.

Cisco Secure Access is deployed in our own on-premise data center.

We are a partner of this vendor, which represents our business relationship beyond being just a customer.

The stability has led to measurable outcomes, as we have fewer tickets.

We do use VPNs in Cisco Secure Access, and we already have Zero Trust, which has influenced our transition.

We do use VPNs in Cisco Secure Access, and we already have Zero Trust, which has influenced our transition.

I would evaluate the AI access feature of Cisco Secure Access for providing deep visibility and control over AI applications, tools, and large language models by saying we will keep an eye on it and talk to our partner manager about the use cases of the AI implementation. My advice to others looking into using Cisco Secure Access is that it is a good solution. I gave this review a rating of nine out of ten.

Cisco Secure Access has many features, and I want to clarify whether the discussion pertains to Cisco ISE or the Cisco client, as the new product name created some confusion with other Cisco products. The solution allows users to connect with our organization's assets from anywhere in a secure manner by providing controls, including firewalls and URL filtering, to deliver comprehensive security for our users and protect them from advanced malware and harmful websites. Overall, its purpose is to safeguard our users during access to our infrastructure on the cloud.

The no-cost migration tools from Umbrella have assisted in streamlining our security policy migration. We also have the cloud to manage all of these products, which works very well for us. We have comprehensive rules from Umbrella, acting as our main firewall. We also implement controls on application control, URL filtering, allow lists, and destination lists to permit or block specific access, including our domain. Therefore, this is very helpful to streamline the implementation for Cisco Secure Access.

Regarding the AI Access feature, I used to use OpenAI, but I will try Cisco's AI tools next time to search for logs. I have tried one, and I think it is very good at allocating logs and knows exactly where the product is and where the issue is. I find it very helpful for us.

I have not yet used the Experience Insight feature, powered by ThousandEyes, but I will do so next time.

I have used the AI assistant feature in Cisco Secure Access. I find it very helpful for viewing logs, analyzing logs, and assisting with issue resolution whenever I am searching for issues. The replies I receive are very quick, professional, and helpful for us.

I am using the Hybrid Private Access feature for varying the enforcement location for ZTNA private traffic. We provide access for our users while enforcing security using these features. It is very good technology overall, and Cisco simplifies it for us and for their customers.

I have tried integrating Cisco Secure Access with Identity Intelligence; we have a trial license for it, and we have gained insights from this license. It is very good and helps us to identify and protect our digital assets. We are considering a decision to purchase this after trying it for the first time.

I have used the policy verification feature to help reduce policy misconfigurations. It acts as a health check for policy configurations and is a powerful tool that recommends settings and configurations for policies.

The effectiveness of AI supply chain risk management is currently under testing. One of my team members is configuring this or working on it, but it is still under evaluation.

What I like the most about Cisco Secure Access is that it has continuous updates for signatures for advanced ransomware; for example, Cisco Umbrella also does this. We can implement controls to prevent access to newly observed domains, with Cisco providing signatures and this information as quickly as possible compared to other vendors. This means if a new website can be malicious and contain ransomware, Cisco ensures that we have immediate information about it. It is fast to gather more information about ransomware and malware, including newly observed domains. Thus, we can say that Cisco provides updated signatures rapidly.

While it is not technically a downside, I think Cisco Secure Access needs more marketing, and the licensing cost should be bundled with other products. This approach would enhance marketing effectiveness, but technically, I do not believe the solution is missing anything.

I have been working with Cisco Secure Access for more than six months.

I have not experienced any lagging, crashing, or downtime; we have gone more than six months without any issues. It is very good.

It is not practical for me to comment on scalability; we have just our one-year product. However, according to the licensing model, I believe it provides scalability.

I have contacted their technical support before, and I consider Cisco TAC to be very professional and very good.

Positive

The initial deployment of Cisco Secure Access is easy, and as it is very common from Cisco, they have a very professional team.

Cisco TAC is very helpful and professional. I reached out to them one day, not during the implementation but after we implemented this product along with other Cisco products. They are a very professional and supportive team.

Cisco Secure Access always requires monitoring for updates and signatures, similar to a health check, but not intensive maintenance. It is very good and very stable. I provide this product with an overall rating of ten out of ten.

I use Cisco Secure Access for the Cisco Secure Firewall or for two-factor authentication that we have. For VPN-based access, I consider Cisco Secure Access, and Secure Client is what we are using for Cisco to connect to the VPN.

There are two different things we use: one is Cisco Secure Client and the other one is Cisco Secure Edge. That is for the different police department also.

Cisco Secure Access is what our proprietary includes, so everything we have a license to, and there is nothing much that we have to put any additional amount toward. That is one of the benefits I can see.

For our growing needs in the organization, Cisco Secure Access scales pretty much to 80 percent right now.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for two years, as of my knowledge, because that is how I got to know about it.

I assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access as very good right now. I have no complaints so far.

I would rate Cisco Secure Access a nine regarding how it scales with our growing needs of an organization.

Regarding customer service and technical support for Cisco Secure Access, there are some problems, but I think it is based upon the user's requirement but nothing from the IT department. I should rate it a 10 out of 10.

My experience in pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access has gone up right now.

I find Cisco Secure Access pretty interesting. Overall, Cisco Secure Access is pretty good so far using it. I have no questions or complaints to report. I would rate this product a 10 overall.

My main use cases for Cisco Secure Access are usually selling to city departments and to businesses as well, so just getting access to it, but mainly just management of it.

I like the dashboard feature of Cisco Secure Access the most, just how simplistic it is and user-friendly, with everything on one page as well.

The benefits I have experienced from the identity-based security measures of Cisco Secure Access are quite significant, and I find them to enhance our security.

I believe Cisco Secure Access can be improved, but I cannot specify which additional features should be included in the next release.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for roughly just a year and a half, two years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access as high, having not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues.

Cisco Secure Access scales tremendously with the growing needs of our organization.

I have not had to expand usage of Cisco Secure Access quite yet, as we are a pretty small town.

I would evaluate my customer service and technical support experience with Cisco Secure Access as a 10 or nine, 10.

On a scale from one being the worst and 10 being the best, I would rate my customer service and technical support probably about a nine, because there are other people that are better, I would say.

Prior to adopting Cisco Secure Access, I was using another solution like Unifi, Ubiquiti, which is also an option just for the smaller companies.

I have seen a return on investment with Cisco Secure Access.

I mean, we ran our own ROIs with Cisco Secure Access and were able to offer it to our clients and customers depending on that, but because of the security, I would say a return on it was achieved, depending on the amount of how big of an order we do.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Cisco Secure Access is that we recently signed a bulk order, so everything is pretty straightforward and adaptable depending on the type of equipment.

Before selecting Cisco Secure Access, I also considered other solutions such as Meraki, Catalyst, and others.

Granular access controls in Cisco Secure Access have helped with managing my user permissions.

I cannot provide any examples at the moment for how the granular access controls are utilized.

I measure the impact of the detailed analytics from Cisco Secure Access on my understanding of network vulnerabilities as pretty effective.

I cannot provide any examples of how the features of Cisco Secure Access have benefited my organization.

I would not say necessarily that I deployed Cisco Secure Access. I just offer it, but I would say just having a limited amount of people who have access to it worked well.

I do not know exactly which cloud provider we would use if it were a public or hybrid cloud for Cisco Secure Access.

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. I have given this review an overall rating of 10.

For Cisco Secure Access, my main use cases are the DNS functionality. Previously, we used Umbrella in the DNS stack functionality, and currently, we are using Cisco Secure Access.

Cisco Secure Access benefits my company by being a platform that integrates more than one solution, making it possible for us to have other solutions in the same platform, allowing us to manage SWG, the DNS part, and firewall.

The feature of Cisco Secure Access I appreciate the most is the DNS functionality. It's the main function that we are using currently. 

The impact Cisco Secure Access has on protecting my company from threats such as phishing and ransomware is significant. 

We utilize it extensively, especially the DNS part, which is very important. Even when we educate our users, the attackers become more advanced each day. They sometimes can use emails and other methods to attempt to attack our company, and Cisco Secure Access can help us protect our users, especially with the incredible DNS part.

The best part of managing Cisco Secure Access through its single cloud management console is that we can purchase as needed and add more products to this platform as necessary, within our budget. 

My perception of Cisco Secure Access's ability to provide secure access via standard HTTP2, and optionally the QUIC protocol, is that the platform is very complete, and the objective is to deliver a full stack of resources regarding security. We are offering this solution to our clients, and the adoption rate is incredibly high. They are very satisfied.

I have noticed that in recent years, particularly over the last year, Cisco has significantly improved the platform by consolidating more solutions within the Cisco Secure Access ecosystem. It is important for Cisco to bring more products. For us and our clients, it is easier to have a single pane of glass to manage all the solutions when discussing security. The platform being in the cloud also makes it easier as we don't have to have something on-premise in our environment for the solution.

We have numerous integrations, including Splunk and other solutions that can be integrated into the same platform. This is particularly beneficial when discussing the solution's benefits.

The worst part was the migration from Umbrella to Cisco Secure Access; we experienced some difficulties during that process.

Improving Cisco Secure Access is difficult for me to discuss in detail as I'm not the administrator of the platform. 

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for more than two years, since it was launched.

Regarding the stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access, at least in Brazil, we don't hear about availability or stability problems. If a client has issues with the internet connection, it might not be the best way to deliver the solutions, however, this is a worldwide situation. We don't have problems with internet connections, especially in the offices, so it is not a problem.

Cisco Secure Access scales effectively with the growing needs of my company because we are talking about a cloud solution. It is easy to scale as necessary, especially when we discuss the DNS functionalities. 

We turn the traffic to the Cisco Secure Access cloud, and we can manage and apply the policies that are necessary, making it very easy to scale the solution.

I don't have direct experience with customer service and technical support, as I don't work in the administration of the solution. TAC is a worldwide service recognized as fantastic. We also have experience with other hardware and software, and my understanding of it is good. It provides good service.

Positive

My company did not consider other solutions before choosing Cisco Secure Access. We are a Cisco partner. 

However, our clients always evaluate other solutions. We work extensively to show the value of the solution since we have competitors, however, Cisco Secure Access has the advantage of delivering multiple solutions in the same single pane of glass.

We had a migration from Cisco Umbrella. There were some problems. However, the process now is easier as the solution is in the cloud and we can add more solutions and activate them in the portal. It's easy now. 

The biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Access is consolidating multiple solutions into a single pane of glass. We have competitors offering alternative solutions; however, they don't deliver the same level of integration as Cisco, which consolidates all solutions simultaneously through a single console.

Regarding pricing, the setup cost, and the licensing of Cisco Secure Access, being from Brazil, the cost for us is a very important point. Sometimes we show the solution for our clients, but the price can be problematic. 

We try to overcome this challenge by presenting the value and importance, especially for today's infrastructure to have more security, avoiding downtime, loss of data, and similar issues. The Cisco products are amazing, but especially in Brazil, when discussing the price, it remains a challenge.

We're a Cisco partner.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cisco Secure Access a nine.

My clients' use cases for Cisco Secure Access involve both business and technical purposes.

Cisco Secure Access is a zero trust network access solution that I propose mostly for network access so clients can access the network or their cloud platform for workload.

One of the strongest parts of Cisco Secure Access is that along with Cisco SD WAN solution, I propose this as a bigger advantage in access and the DNA for secured access while roaming users to the SD WAN tab.

It is very easy to manage Cisco Secure Access through a single cloud console because along with Cisco DNA architecture, it connects smoothly, and Cisco provides two methods: the catalyst SD WAN solution and Meraki.

It helps to secure standard applications.

When speaking about improvements for Cisco Secure Access, the licensing structure is an area of concern, as many users struggle to understand how it works.

I see technical limitations and challenges on the Catalent DMA solution, especially when integrating it with the SD WAN fabric, and it could be easier to integrate the tools.

In terms of features and capabilities for Cisco Secure Access, it could improve user-friendliness for the Catalyst dashboard, whereas Meraki scores ten out of ten for user experience.

I started working with Cisco Secure Access almost three years back, as I am working with Cisco SoC.

From my two decades of experience with Cisco, I find the solution to be stable.

Cisco Secure Access is generally a scalable product.

My experience with Cisco customer service is satisfactory.

I would rate my experience with Cisco support as a nine.

I am working with a couple of competitors' products for the same use case.

The installation procedure for Cisco Secure Access is case-to-case and depends on the customer workload, which allows for proper study based on customer instructions.

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.

In terms of cloud security and SD WAN security, Cisco leads, but in the firewall area, Fortinet is ahead.

My role is that of an integrator with Cisco Secure Access.

Cisco Secure Access integrated with Cisco Talos collaborates effectively, as I see that Cisco Talos has a much higher level of signature intelligence than the competition.

I would say Cisco Secure Access has a huge impact on protecting the company from threats like phishing and ransomware, as Talos provides all the necessary features to mitigate spam, phishing attacks, and offers sophisticated security measures at the gateway and system level.

All these functions will work based on the customer use case, and if the customer uses the SaaS platform, it will help to securely access web applications.

I would say it is beneficial.

The main negative point I see is related to the licensing structure.

I can give Cisco Secure Access an overall score of ten based on my satisfaction with the product.