Listing Thumbnail

    Cisco Secure Access Resource Connector

     Info
    Deployed on AWS
    Cisco Secure Access, Cisco's Security Service Edge (SSE) solution, includes secure Zero Trust Network Access to your company's private/internal resources. Resource connectors are virtual machines deployed in your AWS environment that forward remote user traffic to your applications without requiring open inbound ports in your firewall.
    4.3

    Overview

    Cisco Secure Access

    Cisco Secure Access protects your internal/private resources, user devices, and corporate reputation from malicious and unwelcome activity, safeguarding both inbound and internet-bound traffic using a suite of access and security controls.

    Zero Trust Network Access to private/internal resources

    To protect your private internal resources, Secure Access offers secure, granular Zero Trust Network Access to those resources.

    Resource Connectors forward traffic securely to private internal resources

    Resource connectors are virtual machines deployed in your AWS environment that forward remote user traffic to your applications without requiring open inbound ports in your firewall. Resource connectors simplify setting up Zero Trust Access without any need for complex network configurations.

    More information

    For more information about Cisco Secure Access, see https://www.cisco.com/site/us/en/products/security/secure-access/index.html  For more information about Secure Access options for connecting user traffic to private resources, see https://cisco.com/go/secure-access-network-connection-methods-documentation  To deploy this resource connector image, see https://www.cisco.com/go/secure-access-resource-connectors-aws-documentation 

    Highlights

    • Zero Trust Network Access
    • Easy to deploy and scale
    • No complex network configurations

    Details

    Delivery method

    Delivery option
    64-bit (x86) Amazon Machine Image (AMI)

    Latest version

    Operating system
    Ubuntu 22.04

    Deployed on AWS
    New

    Introducing multi-product solutions

    You can now purchase comprehensive solutions tailored to use cases and industries.

    Multi-product solutions

    Features and programs

    Buyer guide

    Gain valuable insights from real users who purchased this product, powered by PeerSpot.
    Buyer guide

    Financing for AWS Marketplace purchases

    AWS Marketplace now accepts line of credit payments through the PNC Vendor Finance program. This program is available to select AWS customers in the US, excluding NV, NC, ND, TN, & VT.
    Financing for AWS Marketplace purchases

    Pricing

    Cisco Secure Access Resource Connector

     Info
    This product is available free of charge. Free subscriptions have no end date and may be canceled any time.
    Additional AWS infrastructure costs may apply. Use the AWS Pricing Calculator  to estimate your infrastructure costs.

    Vendor refund policy

    Please contact your Cisco sales team or partner for refund information.

    How can we make this page better?

    Tell us how we can improve this page, or report an issue with this product.
    Tell us how we can improve this page, or report an issue with this product.

    Legal

    Vendor terms and conditions

    Upon subscribing to this product, you must acknowledge and agree to the terms and conditions outlined in the vendor's End User License Agreement (EULA) .

    Content disclaimer

    Vendors are responsible for their product descriptions and other product content. AWS does not warrant that vendors' product descriptions or other product content are accurate, complete, reliable, current, or error-free.

    Usage information

     Info

    Delivery details

    64-bit (x86) Amazon Machine Image (AMI)

    Amazon Machine Image (AMI)

    An AMI is a virtual image that provides the information required to launch an instance. Amazon EC2 (Elastic Compute Cloud) instances are virtual servers on which you can run your applications and workloads, offering varying combinations of CPU, memory, storage, and networking resources. You can launch as many instances from as many different AMIs as you need.

    Additional details

    Usage instructions

    Please see Cisco Secure Access Online User Guide for running and activating Resource Connector - https://www.cisco.com/go/secure-access-resource-connectors-aws-documentation 

    Support

    Vendor support

    Support for Secure Access can be reached through Cisco Support at

    AWS infrastructure support

    AWS Support is a one-on-one, fast-response support channel that is staffed 24x7x365 with experienced and technical support engineers. The service helps customers of all sizes and technical abilities to successfully utilize the products and features provided by Amazon Web Services.

    Similar products

    Customer reviews

    Ratings and reviews

     Info
    4.3
    74 ratings
    5 star
    4 star
    3 star
    2 star
    1 star
    51%
    46%
    3%
    0%
    0%
    23 AWS reviews
    |
    51 external reviews
    External reviews are from PeerSpot .
    AK sharma

    Granular access control has protected critical media workflows and now secures high‑stakes events

    Reviewed on Jul 28, 2026
    Review from a verified AWS customer

    What is our primary use case?

    My main use case for Cisco Secure Access  is especially for our security purposes as it provides secure access to only the permitted applications. We work on many applications where different teams come together. They are responsible for different clusters, different domains, different applications, and we are always in a requirement to have the selected level of access to a particular set of people. For that, Cisco Secure Access  is a super tool to work with.

    Initially, VPNs were used, but the problem with VPNs was that it provides access all at once, and then we cannot continuously perform those verifications.

    In my day-to-day operations, we in Synamedia have three business units responsible for three different things: one is control plane, we are into the data plane, and there is a network team as well. Collectively, we are supporting a customer called Astro. There are different applications hosted on the same Kubernetes  cluster. The thing is these are different BUs, so we are bound with the responsibilities and our action should be very much limited. To have a better solution where we can ensure that the right set of people have the right set of privileges and access, we have created Cisco Secure Access for different users accordingly. If anything needs to be done on the control plane side of things, that particular team can do it. If it requires only access to the data plane into the Kubernetes  clusters, then the people in my team have those accesses, so they cannot touch on the control plane side, and the control plane team cannot touch on the data plane.

    The third team, which is on the network side, we don't want to expose our data plane and control plane to them and want to keep the network very much secure with them. So all of us are using the same platform, but we have limited or restricted access, and that's why we can collectively work better ensuring that we are not encroaching into different territories, and everything works very smoothly.

    Recently, we conducted the Olympics, where we had teams from Synamedia, Alibaba, and their affiliates, Mina Tech, involved. Since a lot of revenue is involved, it was an Olympic thing, and we cannot risk security. That's why we went with our Cisco Secure Access. Initially, Synamedia was itself Cisco, and then it moved out as a media domain out of Cisco. To ensure that there is a good level of security and proper access, the particular teams which are supposed to perform necessary actions and need to put their scripts on the platform were taking care of that specific domain. The beauty of that is every time you enter into any platform, you have to go through a series of authentication that needs to be handled appropriately. If you fail, then that particular person cannot enter the platform, making it super secure. With events such as NBAs and Olympics, we want it to be very much secured as there are hackers looking for ways to access our system. In that scenario, it becomes very important that we keep all our clusters, platforms, and applications secured with a trusted solution, and that's why we have gone for Cisco Secure Access.

    What is most valuable?

    I rely on continuous verification and application access the most in my day-to-day work. There are hundreds and thousands of applications running that need to be safe. We cannot just provide access to people since it's a very secured environment; a small mistake can cause bigger problems. Specifically, we operate at three levels on the same platform: Tier 1, responsible for basic monitoring; SROs who are more advanced engineers performing routine actions; and SREs with root privileges. Now, we can create three layers of access: Tier 1 gets access for monitoring only; SROs have privileges for a certain number of applications; and SREs have full access to do whatever is required, ensuring the people with the correct skill set and knowledge have the right access level. With most people working from home, it is crucial to protect our secure data from hackers and malicious attacks because they can exploit systems to bring the entire chain down quickly. It helps that there is a defined process with a series of sequences that need to be followed for logging in, and even post-login, there is a second layer of control ensuring privileges are used correctly without allowing mistakes that could cause platform blunders.

    There is a very common threat that happened three or four years back which was ransom. People were knocking into platforms using credentials and taking over servers. An incident happened at MediaKind where they had an attack from a ransom that froze the origin server. Origin server freezing means all data comes from there, and if hackers compromise that and stop streaming, it can collapse the entire media stream, resulting in huge losses for broadcasters and advertisers. MediaKind faced this for around 30-40 minutes because they used the normal VPN. We quickly realized that this wasn't going to work because VPN just uses credentials that anyone can exploit. Later, we moved to Cisco Secure Access, which goes through MFA. You log into a client, then enter Microsoft Entra ID , followed by MFA, and you authenticate through your phone and authenticator. There are policy engines and ZTNA , and only then you can log into applications and perform tasks.

    In my opinion, Cisco Secure Access offers excellent features, starting with application-level access, not network access, where each time a particular application needs to be accessed, there is a provision for that instead of giving entire network access. The verification feature is nice as it doesn't work as a one-time authenticator, but a continuous verification process occurs. It's more into a zero-trust model, where if it identifies a deviation, it will not let you go in. Everything is centralized and very secure, considering it's on the cloud.

    What needs improvement?

    There are times when Cisco Secure Access feels slow; it takes multiple attempts to log in, which can definitely improve. Even using the same password, it may fail at times, and then you get logged out after some time. I would prefer a faster login experience. Also, it only allows connecting to one environment at a time, which can be a challenge during dynamic expansions. If a solution could allow logging into multiple environments simultaneously before disconnecting from one, it would be great. For example, if we handle ten customers and three have issues, we must connect, check, disconnect, and then repeat for the next, which could be streamlined.

    The overall experience with Cisco Secure Access is good, but the UI could use some enhancements; it's simple and somewhat outdated. Additionally, having alerts for malicious login attempts that trigger on team channels could really help the team.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Cisco Secure Access for almost eight years, six years here and two years in Ericsson.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Cisco Secure Access is quite stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Its scalability is excellent, as it handles member logins instantaneously.

    How are customer service and support?

    Customer support for Cisco Secure Access is very good. After facing an issue recently, I would rate customer support an eight out of ten.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Before Cisco Secure Access, we were using VPNs, but we switched because it wasn't very secure; any exposed username and password posed a security threat.

    What was our ROI?

    We haven't broken down to the level of measuring ROI yet, but in terms of investment, it's been decent. We save effort, not just money, as it simplifies control and management. Previously, we managed numerous licenses for the same set of tasks, whereas with one license from Cisco Secure Access, we can multitask, providing application-level access and proper authenticators, making it a super tool overall.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access are quite reasonable by market standards, considering the wealth of features we receive; this is a critical factor for us in ensuring security at a reasonable price.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We evaluated other options, including F5 and FortiClient , but found that they were not as good compared to Cisco Secure Access.

    What other advice do I have?

    For those looking into using Cisco Secure Access, I would say it's a very good solution that fulfills your security needs. Cisco Secure Access is a good tool. I would give this product a rating of nine out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    reviewer2855301

    Centralized zero trust access has improved secure remote work while AI consistently strengthens oversight

    Reviewed on Jul 28, 2026
    Review provided by PeerSpot

    What is our primary use case?

    My main use case for Cisco Secure Access  is providing secure remote access to internal applications while enforcing Zero Trust security policies. For example, in a lab environment, I used it to securely connect to internal web applications without exposing them directly to the internet. I also used its Secure Web Gateway to monitor and filter web traffic based on organizational policies. Day-to-day, it helps ensure that only authenticated and authorized users can access specific resources, improving security while maintaining a smooth user experience for remote users.

    One thing I appreciated about my main use case and the authentication process with Cisco Secure Access  was how it centralizes access management and security policies in a single platform. Once authentication and access rules were configured, day-to-day administration became much simpler. It also provided good visibility into user access and security events, making it easier to identify and investigate potential issues. Overall, it improved security without creating unnecessary friction for end-users, which was one of the biggest advantages.

    What is most valuable?

    The standout features of Cisco Secure Access are its Zero Trust Network Access , ZTNA , Secure Web Gateway, and multi-factor authentication, MFA, integration. I also appreciate its centralized policy management, which makes it easy to enforce consistent security rules across users and devices. The detailed visibility into user activity and security events helps with monitoring and troubleshooting. Additionally, its cloud-based architecture provides secure access for remote and hybrid users without relying on traditional VPNs, making it both scalable and easy to manage. Overall, these features significantly improve security while maintaining a smooth user experience.

    Compared with similar secure access solutions, Cisco Secure Access stands out because of its tight integration with the Cisco security ecosystem and its unified cloud-native platform. Instead of managing multiple separate tools, administrators can enforce consistent security policies from a single console. I also found the Zero Trust approach and detailed visibility into user activity to be stronger than many traditional VPN solutions. These features make it easier to secure remote users while simplifying management, making the platform a good fit for organizations with hybrid or distributed workforces.

    What needs improvement?

    Cisco Secure Access is a strong platform, but there are a few areas that could be improved. The initial setup and policy configuration can be complex, especially for organizations new to Zero Trust architecture. The user interface could be more intuitive, making advanced features easier to locate and configure. Reporting  and analytics could also provide more customizable dashboards and detailed insights. Providing broader integration and simpler troubleshooting guides would help administrators resolve issues more quickly and improve the overall management experience.

    I think Cisco Secure Access could benefit from deeper integrations with a wider range of third-party identity providers, SIEM  platforms, and endpoint security solutions to simplify deployment in mixed-vendor environments. I would also like to see more built-in troubleshooting tools and guided policy recommendations, which would reduce the learning curve for new administrators and make ongoing management more efficient.

    The reporting tools and third-party integrations could be more flexible and user-friendly. These are areas for improvement, but they do not outweigh the platform's overall strengths and value.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Cisco Secure Access for approximately six months.

    How was the initial setup?

    The authentication process for users in Cisco Secure Access was generally straightforward and easy to configure. Integrating it with an identity provider and enabling multi-factor authentication, MFA, was smooth, and the user onboarding experience was simple. The main challenge was configuring access policies correctly for different user groups during the initial setup, as it required careful planning and testing. Once those policies were in place, authentication became reliable and seamless. Overall, the setup was manageable, and the platform provided a secure, yet user-friendly login experience.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would confidently recommend Cisco Secure Access to organizations looking to modernize secure remote access.

    Cisco Secure Access has a strong approach to AI governance and security. I appreciate that its AI-driven capabilities are supported by Zero Trust principles, identity-based access controls, and continuous monitoring. The platform provides good visibility into user activity and helps detect suspicious behavior while maintaining strict security policies. From a governance perspective, centralized policy management and detailed audit logs support compliance.

    I believe there is still room for improvement.

    I find the AI capabilities of Cisco Secure Access to be accurate and reliable for most security-related tasks. The platform consistently identifies potential threats, provides relevant security insights, and helps prioritize alerts, which reduces manual effort for administrators. In my experience, the recommendations are generally actionable and aligned with security best practices. While no AI system is perfect and some alerts may require manual verification, the overall accuracy is high enough to improve operational efficiency and support faster decision-making. I would consider its AI output trustworthy for day-to-day security operations. I gave this review a rating of 9.

    GANESAN K

    Secure access has strengthened DNS protection and unified threat visibility for our environment

    Reviewed on Jul 23, 2026
    Review provided by PeerSpot

    What is our primary use case?

    I have been working with Cisco Secure Access  for the past five years. We have multiple use cases for Cisco Secure Access , with most of them associated with DNS filtering security. We use it as a replacement for secure internet, providing web filtering. Instead of giving a web filtering or proxy solution, we provide it as a DNS filtering solution where it helps us to stop the traffic even before reaching the malicious server. In normal traditional proxy solutions, end user traffic generated from the system and endpoints reaches the malicious or unauthorized servers, and then while getting a response back to the end-user machine, the proxy blocks that particular request or response sent from the server. In this case, what Cisco is providing is a DNS security advantage license and a security gateway. They have a higher role where they can control the traffic when the traffic is generated from the end-user endpoint machine itself. That itself is an advantage for controlling our traffic to the public IP of the malicious and unauthorized servers. That is one key advantage which we have for this use case.

    We also provide secure access for people who want to access the internal application from outside. We give AnyConnect, which checks whether they are connecting to the network from the proper device assigned to them. If not, we can block that particular device for a time interval if we see that the device is vulnerable. These are the kinds of use cases we are working with Cisco Secure Access.

    What is most valuable?

    Cisco Secure Access ZTNA  feature helps in securing standard applications because it actually monitors every given interval as we configure. It checks for the security posture at every interval even after the device is connected. If a device gets connected and infected through some kind of malicious software or by using pen drives, it eventually gets isolated when Cisco Secure Access ZTNA  finds that it does not fall under the given compliance. We have to give some security checks, and based on those checks, it will verify the security posture in ZTNA.

    Cisco Talos  influences threat detection and response capabilities in the organization because Cisco Talos  is a threat intelligence machine for the Cisco brand. They have integrations with Talos in all the solutions, whether it is EDR, Umbrella , or SecureX. Basically, they provide integrations with each and every engine, and the point I want to make is that Talos intelligence is inbuilt within Cisco Secure Access itself.

    SecureX incorporates all the other Cisco products. SecureX covers integration with all the Cisco solutions provided. For example, we can integrate SecureX with EDR, XDR , Cisco Secure Access, switches, routers, and Cisco firewalls, including email security solutions. In a Cisco environment, we can have full visibility, and this is what I see when protecting against threats such as phishing and ransomware—Cisco Secure Access is effective.

    What needs improvement?

    There is one particular disadvantage of Cisco Secure Access, and the main thing is pricing. Apart from that, I do not think it has any other disadvantage. One more thing adding to that is that in some cases, for some of our clients, we have issues with latency while they are accessing their internal resources from their home locations. However, we were able to address it partially with the help of Cisco documentation.

    Managing Cisco Secure Access through a single cloud-managed console is neither very easy nor very complex. It is acceptable, but they can improve the simplicity of the console.

    Pricing and simplicity could be improved, but I do not see any other main parts for improvement with Cisco Secure Access.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with Cisco Secure Access for five years now. Overall in the business, I have eight years of experience.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Cisco Secure Access is a cloud solution, so it is pretty much scalable.

    How are customer service and support?

    Cisco customer service is average. It is neither good nor bad. I would rate Cisco customer service five out of ten points. For the support, I would say they could be faster. Two or three years ago, Cisco support was very good, rated around eight or nine, but now the support engineers seem unaware of what their product is capable of. I have seen issues where I needed to explain use cases multiple times and escalate them multiple times to get solutions, leading me to rate them five now.

    How was the initial setup?

    Cisco Secure Access installation process is quite straightforward, but we do have to do some manual work such as preparing a script.

    What was our ROI?

    If you have a Cisco environment, it will give the best ROI. Everything must be of Cisco product family only, starting with EDR, XDR , mail security, switches, firewalls, and access through ZTNA. If you have every solution with Cisco, you can see a very good ROI because you do not need to invest much on staffing for analyzing each and every console separately. Everything will be monitored, and all those logs from various Cisco solutions will be coming under one console, which helps in clarifying what we have and any security loopholes in our environment that security teams need today.

    I cannot quantify ROI specifically, such as ten percent or twenty percent, as it varies based on the environment. For a fully Cisco environment, it could be around sixty percent to seventy percent ROI or more, but if it is not a fully Cisco environment, it would be much less due to various integrations with other third-party solutions, which are not at a very granular level. Therefore, the ROI is greater with more Cisco solutions and less with fewer solutions.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    While comparing Cisco Secure Access with competitors, Trend Micro would be an exact competitor. Trend Micro gives many solutions under a single console, such as Trend Vision One , and they have also incorporated AI security. However, when it comes to XDR solutions, there are several in the leader quadrant such as SentinelOne and CrowdStrike, but SecureX has not emerged as a leader in the XDR space. Cisco Secure Access itself is good, as we have not seen any attacks in Cisco environments, but as per compliance, we should not rely on a single vendor in our environment. Trend Micro is a leader quadrant product and has been a major provider for many enterprise banks, especially in large enterprises, making it one of the good competitors for Cisco Secure Access.

    For the CASB  functionality with Cisco Secure Access, I have not worked that much on CASB  for Cisco Secure Access. When it comes to CASB , we have solutions such as Forcepoint, CloudSEK, Netskope , or Zscaler. With these products, we have plenty of CASB  use cases. I have not worked with Cisco Secure Access on CASB.

    What other advice do I have?

    I mentioned both the advantages and the use cases of Cisco Secure Access. Usually, what we do is block QUIC traffic because the QUIC traffic is based out of UDP on port 443. By initially blocking QUIC protocol traffic, if the customer specifically asks, we will enable QUIC traffic for particular applications alone. Since it is part of best practice, we usually block it. However, in some use cases, we have enabled the QUIC protocol and provided bypassing instructions for those UDP protocols. The basic reason we block QUIC protocols is that it is a safe encrypted protocol. We cannot inspect QUIC traffic using inspection engines in web proxy or SecureX, as established with HTTPS and HTTP. That is why we prefer to block QUIC protocols, but it does work well when enabled. I give this product an overall review rating of eight.

    Vishnu Narahari

    Secure remote access has transformed hybrid work and supports a stronger zero trust strategy

    Reviewed on Jul 16, 2026
    Review provided by PeerSpot

    What is our primary use case?

    Cisco Secure Access  serves as our primary solution for providing secure remote access to corporate applications and resources for a distributed workforce. We use it to enforce consistent security policies across users, devices, and locations, while enabling access to both cloud-based and on-premises applications.

    A good example of this is supporting our hybrid workforce. Employees regularly work from home, at customer sites, and while traveling, and Cisco Secure Access  provides secure connectivity to internal applications without requiring full network access. In one instance, a contractor needed access to a specific application hosted in our data center. Using Cisco Secure Access, we were able to grant application-level access based on identity and device posture rather than opening broad VPN access. This improved security while allowing the contractor to become productive immediately. The platform also provided visibility into access activity and automatically enforced policies, which reduced administrative effort and helped us maintain compliance requirements. The experience was seamless for the user and significantly reduced the risk associated with traditional remote access methods.

    In addition to secure remote access, we leverage Cisco Secure Access to strengthen our zero trust security strategy across the organization. We use granular access controls to ensure users can only reach the applications and resources required for their roles, which helps reduce risk and simplify compliance efforts. The solution also provides valuable visibility into our users' activity, device posture, and potential security threats, allowing our security team to respond more quickly to unusual behavior. Another benefit has been the ability to provide secure access for third-party vendors and contractors without exposing the broader network. The centralized management, consistent policy enforcement, and seamless user experience have made Cisco Secure Access an important part of our overall security and hybrid workflow infrastructure.

    What is most valuable?

    Cisco Secure Access offers several features that stand out for our organization supporting modern hybrid work environments. One of the most valuable capabilities is its zero trust network access (ZTNA ), which provides secure identity-based access to applications without exposing the entire network. The platform also delivers strong security controls through continuous user and device verification, helping ensure that only authorized users can access sensitive resources. Another key feature is centralized policy management, which allows administrators to create and enforce consistently secure policies across users, devices, and locations.

    The feature that has had the biggest impact for our team is zero trust network access (ZTNA ). Prior to implementing Cisco Secure Access, remote users often required broader network access through traditional VPN connections, which increased administrative overhead and security concerns. With ZTNA, access is granted at the application level based on user identity, device posture, and security policies rather than network location. This approach has significantly improved our security posture by reducing the attack surface and limiting lateral movement opportunities. It has also streamlined our workload because access requests are easier to manage and policies can be applied consistently across users and applications. Employees and contractors are able to securely connect to the resources they need from any location without sacrificing performance or user experience. The combination of stronger security, simplified access management, and improved visibility has made ZTNA the most valuable capability within Cisco Secure Access for our organization.

    What needs improvement?

    Overall, Cisco Secure Access has been a strong solution for secure remote access and zero trust security, but there are a few areas where it could be improved. The initial deployment and policy design process can be complex, particularly for organizations with a large number of applications, diverse user groups, and existing security integrations. Defining and fine-tuning access policies requires careful planning to avoid overly restrictive and overly permissive accesses. Another challenge is that troubleshooting access issues can sometimes require navigating multiple dashboards and logs, which can increase the time needed to diagnose problems. While the reporting and visibility features are useful, more streamlined and customizable reporting options would help security and operations teams gain insights faster. We have also encountered occasional learning curves for administrators who are new to zero trust concepts and Cisco policy framework. Additionally, guided information, configuration tools, and simplified policy recommendations could make onboarding easier. These challenges are relatively minor compared to the security, visibility, and management benefits the platform provides. With continued enhancements to usability, reporting, and policy management workflows, Cisco Secure Access could become even more effective for enterprise environments.

    One improvement that would make a significant difference for our team would be more intelligent policy recommendation and automation capabilities. As our organization scales, managing access policies across multiple applications, user groups, and devices can become complex. Having AI-driven recommendations that suggest policy optimizations, identify potential misconfigurations, and highlight overly permissive access rules would help reduce administrative effort and improve security consistency. We would also like to see more unified troubleshooting and reporting capabilities. While the platform provides strong visibility, having a single view that correlates user activity, device posture, policy decisions, and access events would help administrators resolve issues more quickly.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Cisco Secure Access for approximately twelve to thirteen months.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Cisco Secure Access has been a stable and reliable platform. In our experience, the service consistently provides secure connectivity for remote users, contractors, and hybrid environments with minimal disruption. Our day-to-day operations run smoothly, and the platform has effectively met access requirements across cloud and on-premises environments. From an availability perspective, we have experienced strong and dependable performance. Users generally access a high percentage of resources without connectivity issues, and the cloud-delivered architecture helps ensure consistent service regardless of user location. Overall, it has been a good experience and very stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Cisco Secure Access has kept pace with our increased adoption of cloud-based applications without requiring significant infrastructure changes or adding complexity. One of the biggest advantages is the cloud-delivered architecture, which allows us to access applications quickly while maintaining security and user experience. Instead of deploying and managing additional hardware, we can scale through centralized management, which has significantly reduced operational effort. The platform has enabled us to respond to changing business needs, hybrid working conditions, cloud migration, and evolving security requirements. We have been able to enforce consistent access controls across both cloud-hosted and on-premises applications while maintaining visibility and compliance. Performance has remained consistent, usage has increased, and we have not experienced scalability-related limitations. From an administration perspective, the centralized management capability is easy to support without proportionally increasing workload. It has provided the flexibility needed to adapt to changing technology without significant redesign or additional infrastructure investments.

    How are customer service and support?

    Our experience with Cisco Secure Access customer support has generally been positive. Cisco provides multiple support channels, including a support document knowledge base and access to specialists when needed. For standard issues and configuration questions, response times have been reasonable, and support engineers have demonstrated strong technical knowledge of both the platform and Cisco Secure Access. Another strength of the support has been their ability to assist with our complex deployment involving zero trust implementation, integrations with hybrid environments, and security policy management. During the implementation and ongoing operations, we have been able to leverage Cisco documentation and support resources to use new features more effectively. The critical issues escalation process has worked well, helping minimize our impact. We have also found community resources, including guides and best practice documentation, to be valuable supplements to direct support interactions. While it can vary depending on the specific issue and the support team involved, our overall experience has been positive with Cisco Secure Access support.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We previously relied heavily on traditional VPN connectivity for remote access, and Cisco Secure Access has played an important role in our transition toward the ZTNA model rather than providing broad network access through a VPN. ZTNA enables secure access to applications based on user identity, device posture, location, and security policies. The transition has significantly improved both security and user experience. With traditional VPNs, users often received access to a larger portion of the network than necessary, which increased risk and administrative complexity. Cisco Secure Access allows us to grant access only to the specific applications and resources required for the user's role, reducing the attack surface and supporting zero trust. From an operational perspective, the migration has simplified access management and reduced the number of VPN-related support issues. Users experience more seamless connectivity because they no longer need to establish a full VPN session for every task, and administrators can manage policies centrally through a unified platform. We still maintain limited VPN access for certain legacy systems and specialized use cases, but the majority of our remote access strategy now relies on ZTNA. Cisco Secure Access has made the transition from VPN to ZTNA smoother than expected by providing stronger security controls, better visibility into our user activity, simplified administration, and a more consistent experience for remote and hybrid workers.

    How was the initial setup?

    Our experience with Cisco Secure Access pricing and licensing has generally been positive. While the solution is not the lowest cost option in the market, we found that the value provided through security, scalable centralized management, and zero trust capabilities justifies the investment when evaluating the total cost of ownership. It helps reduce the need for multiple standalone security and remote access solutions, which simplified operations and improved overall efficiency. The initial setup and implementation costs were largely associated with planning, policy design, integration with identity providers, and migration from existing remote access technologies. Like most enterprise security platforms, deployment requires careful preparation and stakeholder involvement, but Cisco provided sufficient documentation and support resources to make the process manageable.

    What was our ROI?

    We have seen a measurable return on investment from Cisco Secure Access, both from a security and operational perspective. One of the biggest benefits has been the reduction in administrative effort through centralized policy management and automated access controls. We estimate that tasks related to user provisioning, access modifications, and policy administration require approximately twenty-five to thirty percent less effort compared to our previous approach. We have also seen a noticeable reduction in access-related support tickets as users experience more reliable and streamlined connectivity through the zero trust model. This has allowed IT and security teams to spend less time troubleshooting remote access issues and more time focusing on strategic initiatives. Incident investigations and resolution times have improved as well due to better visibility into user activity, application access, and network performance. From a financial perspective, Cisco Secure Access has helped us consolidate several security and remote access functions into a single platform, reducing operational complexity and minimizing the need for additional infrastructure. The cloud-delivered architecture also lowers maintenance requirements compared to managing traditional remote access solutions. Overall, the combination of improved security, faster onboarding, and reduced administrative workload, fewer support issues, and better operational efficiency has delivered a strong return on investment. While the exact savings vary by organization, the productivity gains and the risk reduction have more than justified the investment for us.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Before adopting Cisco Secure Access, we primarily relied on traditional VPN-based remote access solutions combined with supporting security tools for web filtering, access control, and visibility. While the hub approach met basic remote access requirements, it became increasingly difficult to manage as our workforce became more distributed and our cloud adoption increased. We decided to move to Cisco Secure Access because we wanted a more modern, zero trust architecture that could provide secure identity-based access to applications rather than broader network-level connectivity. The previous solution required more manual management, offered limited visibility into user activity, and created additional complexity when supporting employees, contractors, and third-party partners. Cisco Secure Access stood out because it combined ZTNA, secure policy enforcement, threat protection, and centralized management with user experience monitoring within a unified platform. The ability to apply consistent policies across cloud and on-premises resources improved visibility and reduced reliance on traditional VPN infrastructure, making the transition compelling. Since making the switch, we have improved security, reduced administrative workload, enhanced our user experience, and gained better insight into application access and network activity. The move has also supported our broader zero trust and hybrid work initiatives, making Cisco Secure Access a better fit for our long-term security strategy.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We conducted a thorough evaluation of several secure access and zero trust solutions before selecting Cisco Secure Access. The products we considered included Zscaler Private Access, Alternate Network solutions, Netskope , Microsoft-based security, and remote access solutions that align with our existing cloud strategy. Our evaluation focused on several criteria, including zero trust capabilities, ease of deployment, visibility into applications and activity, integrations with existing security investments, scalability, reporting, and overall user experience. We also assessed each vendor's ability to support hybrid environments that include both cloud-hosted and on-premises applications. Ultimately, Cisco Secure Access stood out because of its strong combination of ZTNA functionality, unified policy management, cloud-delivered security services, AI-driven insights, Thousand Eyes integration for digital experience monitoring, and compatibility with broader security ecosystems. We also valued the ability to manage security policies consistently across remote users, branch locations, and private applications from a centralized platform. While the competing solutions offered strong features in specific areas, Cisco Secure Access provided the best overall security, visibility, operational simplicity, and long-term scalability for our requirements. The platform blended well with our zero trust strategy and offered a path for future required architectural changes.

    What other advice do I have?

    My biggest piece of advice is to approach Cisco Secure Access as a strategic, zero trust initiative rather than simply a replacement for traditional VPN technology. Organizations get the most value when they take the time to understand application requirements and security objectives prior to deployment. Having a sound access strategy and well-crafted policy creation makes it much easier to maximize both security and user experience. I would recommend starting with a phased rollout, beginning with a simpler group of users and application policies, gathering feedback, and then expanding gradually. This approach facilitates smoother implementation and wider adoption. Another key takeaway is to take advantage of the platform's features, including digital experience monitoring through Thousand Eyes and centralized policy management.

    Overall, Cisco Secure Access has been a valuable component of our security strategy. The platform has modernized our approach to secure connections by supporting zero trust, improving user and application access, and reducing our dependence on traditional VPN-based remote access. We have benefited from centralized policy management, strong security controls, digital experience monitoring capabilities, and the ability to deliver a consistent experience for remote and third-party users. Continuous use of Cisco Secure Access has provided the flexibility and scalability needed to support changing business requirements without adding operational complexity. The overall benefits have far outweighed those challenges. If I were to summarize the platform in a few words, I would describe it as secure, highly reliable, and aligned with modern zero trust strategies. For organizations looking to strengthen security while managing a distributed workforce, Cisco Secure Access presents a strong option with both operational and security value. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

    Asif-Qureshi

    Hybrid access has unified secure cloud and data center connectivity for diverse client needs

    Reviewed on Jun 18, 2026
    Review from a verified AWS customer

    What is our primary use case?

    The major use cases for clients regarding Cisco Secure Access  involve ZTNA , for when you require cloud services, like ZTNA , Secure Web Gateway, CASB , and Firewall as a Service. When you want to secure your on-premises equipment, on-premises data center, or services center, we provide the connectivity through the cloud, and at that moment, we use Cisco Secure Access .

    The ZTNA part in Cisco is very important because it helps my customers to secure applications. When you configure your application or deploy your application on the on-premises data center and you want to access it where there is no trust on the inbound—whether you are an enterprise user, a remote user, or any other user coming through the cloud—then you will provide only the split tunnel or the tunnel between the cloud and your data center, which provides Cisco Secure Access.

    CASB  is also relevant when your services are deployed in many different cloud services, as you can use CASB  in those scenarios.

    What is most valuable?

    The biggest benefit of Cisco Secure Access, compared to Fortinet or other solutions from Palo Alto or Prisma, is its adaptability to different network environments.

    Customers appreciate the good features of Cisco Secure Access because it is a hybrid network solution. When there is a hybrid network, customers require Cisco Secure Access so they can access both cloud services and on-premises data center services.

    I would say it is easy to manage Cisco Secure Access through this console. It is similar to managing a firewall, such as the FTD, and the console is straightforward.

    What needs improvement?

    I have seen that if the on-premises devices are Cisco devices, then we use Cisco SSE. However, when there are Fortinet devices, then we use FortiSSE, which indicates a potential area for improvement.

    Cisco could add new features in the future, such as enhanced automation capabilities. They are providing automation in their technology, which is an improvement area. If you use automation tools like Red Hat, you can perform automation more effectively. Regarding AI, I think Cisco is doing well, though there is still room for improvement in AI capabilities.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I started working with Cisco Secure Access relatively recently, but I understand how it works and how we submit proposals for Cisco Secure Access and Fortinet security solutions. When we require cloud security, then we provide Cisco Secure Access and SSE.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Cisco is stable and reliable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability mostly depends on the architecture, not on the hardware or OEM. How you architect and define the network design determines scalability. If you do not have a good architecture, you cannot achieve scalability.

    How are customer service and support?

    I think Cisco's technical support is good. I believe that both Cisco technical support and Juniper technical support are very good.

    What other advice do I have?

    If the requirement is for Cisco equipment, then we propose Cisco Secure Access. If the requirement is for Fortinet, then we provide FortiSafety.

    As a system implementer, I think the biggest advantage of the product is its usability in various scenarios.

    I am not certain who is the leader when comparing Cisco with Fortinet and Palo Alto. Both are good at what they do, and sometimes we cannot use all the features of any product. We use specialized or customized features for our data center according to customer requirements, and all follow standard features and protocols, which are good.

    The HTTP protocol is important for connecting through the cloud or establishing a tunnel. A VPN service and another tunnel between the cloud SSE and your on-premises data center are essential.

    Cisco Secure Client provides the resource connector. There is a connector on the on-premises data center, so we establish a secure connection, mostly VPN or IPsec VPN, between the cloud and the data center.

    I would say that Cisco Secure Access is effective in protection from ransomware and phishing attacks. It is a standard they are using, and when you are using Cisco devices, then you can rely on Cisco cloud.

    Both deployment parts are not very difficult. It is straightforward.

    I did not deploy Cisco Secure Access myself, but I understand from my team that it is not a big challenge.

    Cisco could add new features in the future, such as enhanced automation capabilities. They are providing automation in their technology, which is an improvement area.

    My experience is primarily with clients using a hybrid model.

    We mostly integrate with Azure  and AWS  through the cloud.

    I cannot say who is the leader when comparing Cisco with Fortinet and Palo Alto. Both are good at what they do, and sometimes we cannot use all the features of any product. We use specialized or customized features for our data center according to customer requirements, and all follow standard features and protocols, which are good.

    I would rate Cisco support at an eight out of ten. The overall review rating for this product is nine out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    View all reviews