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 main use case for Cisco Secure Access is remote access.

As an aerospace company, security is highly important for us, and we have various security schemas across the company. We try not to treat everybody as the highest schema, so Cisco Secure Access gives us the ability to detect and put users where they need to go and not just shove everybody into the whole secure area.

I find the posture checking feature of Cisco Secure Access the most valuable, and I also appreciate the ability to tag clients to place them into the right segment.

We're just getting started with Zero Trust Network Access, and we have a long way to go in that aspect. We haven't expanded any usage; more of the posture and things we've done more with technology.  

They've protected us from threats like phishing and ransomware.

The only improvement I see for Cisco Secure Access is the way that we're using it; we're not fully integrating it into our client consoles, which affects the user experience. That's more of an internal issue than a Cisco issue. 

I struggle with the integration of CASB functionality for exposing Shadow IT within our organization. As a company of engineers, they tend to do smart things and just go around you, so it's always a challenge for us.

Regarding the integration with Cisco Talos, it's something that we're not utilizing as best as we can. We should leverage Talos more. 

From a licensing perspective, Cisco can improve. It gets very complicated about what's included and what's not included. The way that we're using Cisco Secure Access today, it doesn't scale with the growing needs of our organization, however, if we leveraged more of the cloud services, it would fit better.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for seven years.

Cisco Secure Access has been pretty stable. I can't really speak to downtime or performance issues much; I know we've had a few. I don't have the details to say whether it was a Cisco problem or an internal issue.

The way that we're using Cisco Secure Access today, it doesn't scale with the growing needs of our organization, however, if we leveraged more of the cloud services, it would fit better.

I don't really get involved with customer service and technical support. From a cloud team perspective, I'm aware of generally how we approach it. On a scale of one to ten, I would give customer service and technical support an eight.

Positive

Prior to adopting Cisco Secure Access, I have used another solution.

I wasn't involved in the deployment of Cisco Secure Access. That said, I'm not aware of major issues.

I don't see ROI with Cisco Secure Access right now; it's more of an internal issue. We have too many access platforms, and we need to consolidate. If we could solidify our access platform and eliminate non-duplication, the ROI would look much better than it does right now. That's our problem, not a Cisco issue.

I don't get involved in pricing scenarios; however, from a licensing perspective, Cisco can improve. It gets very complicated about what's included and what's not included.

We're definitely looking at more SaaS-based solutions such as Zscaler and Palo Alto before selecting Cisco Secure Access, dabbling in them yet never fully committing.

We did not purchase the solution via AWS Marketplace.

We consider a change since we're trying to achieve a user experience that's lighter weight. 

I'm not an administrator, so I can't really speak to the ease or difficulty of managing Cisco Secure Access through a single cloud-managed console.

I would advise other potential customers or organizations considering Cisco Secure Access to take a closer look. They've added some features in the last year or so that have advanced significantly. They've caught up from the market where other people were ahead of them. I rate Cisco Secure Access seven out of ten.

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.

Our main use cases for Cisco Secure Access include everything, such as all of our switching and wireless.

I mostly work on the level one switching side. I deal with all the Catalyst 9300 switches and 9280 wireless routers.

It's pretty streamlined. Everything you need to find is in the GUI interface, and if you have any trouble, it's easy to navigate and get around. 

Cisco Secure Access has had a positive impact on protecting our organization from threats such as phishing and ransomware. It provides security and adds additional layers.

I perceive Cisco Secure Access's ability to provide secure access via standard HTTP2, and optionally QUIC protocol, as great and secure.

The licensing is confusing.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for only a year since joining the company last year. However, the company has been using it for almost ten years.

We have not had any downtime.

Cisco Secure Access scales with the growing needs of my organization. It works effectively for our needs.

I would rate their technical support a nine out of ten. They are quick to respond and generally quick to find a resolution and figure out what's wrong.

Positive

I have not used another solution to address similar needs in another role.

It was already in place when I got here.

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

The advice I would give to other organizations considering Cisco Secure Access is to implement it as it's pretty straightforward. 

I would rate Cisco Secure Access a nine out of ten.

The main use cases for Cisco Secure Access involve secure access to the network, as they've had some history with malware, ransomware, and things like that. They are focused on better control for remote users and access to the network.

The ease of use for end users is always a big deal. We don't want to make it too hard for them. We're currently working on an end-to-end secure access solution. We are invested in Cisco, but there are other vendors involved as well, and trying to develop a holistic strategy has been a challenge for us. We have to avoid over-securing to the point where it becomes problematic, as too many hoops for users to jump through is always a challenge. It has to be easy because if it's not easy to use, they won't use it or will find back doors to it, which is a problem. That's where we're at with it.

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

This is my first time in healthcare after being in commercial space for a long time. It's always a challenge because we can't just turn stuff off as we could in the commercial space, since it may interfere with patient care. It takes longer to understand what's going on, so anything that could help give us a faster understanding of what's happening, why it's there, and if it's a risk to us would be helpful. We don't have any good tools right now, which is a problem.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for two months or so.

Cisco Secure Access has been good for stability and reliability; it hasn't crashed in the two months I've been using it.

We have a dedicated account team, so we've got all the people we need to engage with if there's an issue. It makes deploying in a larger enterprise a very easy choice. Having that backing is a comfort because, for more point-specific products or vendors, if you don't know who's going to stand behind them after you turn the lights on, that can be a concern. Cisco ensures support for the technology you use.

Positive

You have to have a good ROI and a compelling story with finance; I've definitely seen that. I came from Amazon, so it was a complete 180-degree turn. Not to say that there were unlimited funds at Amazon, but you didn't have to tell the story as richly. I was on the fulfillment side. Even if it didn't seem fully vetted, but appeared to make sense or had potential to improve speed and delivery, they bid on it pretty early.

It's different here. They want it thoroughly vetted with a deeper ROI. We need to understand the cost of an hour of outage at a hospital, which, at least here, they don't know. However, at Amazon, we knew exactly how much it would cost if a fulfillment center was down for an hour. We have to do a better job of that in our organization, and once we can clarify those points, we will achieve some of the wins needed to get things done.

Cisco is a rock-solid company and a leader in the network space, and I believe they will always provide the right level of support. 

I would rate Cisco Secure Access an eight out of ten.

Our business is in energy. We are using it to provide protection for different remote energy sites and for all the data that we transfer from the solar, wind, and hydrocarbon sites.

Cisco Secure Access interacts pretty easily with another platform that we have in place. The interaction with other platforms has been pretty easy. This was the reason for implementing this product.

Cisco Secure Access has protected our company against threats such as phishing or ransomware, as we have seen it successfully address various cybersecurity vulnerabilities. In the next couple of years, we are aware of an increase in attacks or other risks, with Cisco continually improving its protective measures for customers.

The integration with Cisco Talos has influenced our organization's threat detection and response capabilities positively, as we collect different data information not only for operations but also for purposes such as VIPs and information detection records that we have in storage. We have seen it interact pretty well with the data that we use for different purposes.

The firewall section for IDP is the most used for remote sites. It fits better with all the data we're collecting from the protection site and the information that we provide to another customer. 

We have implemented the Zero Trust Network Access feature of Cisco Secure Access in our OT environment, which is the operational section or protection network. From my perspective, Cisco Secure Access has helped our company in securing standard applications with a rating of nine out of ten.

In my opinion, Cisco Secure Access could be improved by potentially incorporating features that other brands have been using. I see benefits from features offered by competitors, which could enhance the Cisco experience if adapted thoughtfully.

I have been using Cisco Secure Access for around seven years.

The stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access are very stable.

Cisco Secure Access scales with the growing needs of our company. If Cisco continues to offer improvements every year with its products, we would be inclined to renew our solution each year. However, if we feel that the product doesn't meet our expectations, we are open to change.

My experience with customer service and technical support for Cisco Secure Access has been good. We deal with different products in the US, Europe, and Latin America. We believe that the level of customer support has met our expectations.

Positive

We used another brand previously, which offered protection at a level but had its limitations, leading us to elaborate on choosing Cisco for the better offerings it provides.

We have third-party vendors. It is a good option to get implementation support from Cisco. 

We have a hybrid deployment model with the AWS cloud.

From my point of view, the biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Access is the security it provides, and I believe the best word to describe it is best security, ensuring our protection.

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

We have been implementing different tools over the past months for protection and security against AI and new technology coming from the cloud.

In terms of Cisco Secure Access's ability to provide secure access via standard HTTP2 and optionally QUIC protocol, I expect that Cisco will improve these features and protocols over the next couple of years. I expect that Cisco will continue to prove itself as we see other technologies doing similar work.

Overall, I would rate Cisco Secure Access a nine out of ten.

Positive

Positive

I use this solution for securing security controls like Secure Security Control (SSC) for local Internet breakouts. It offers a unified security policy across Google sites, providing secure web gateways, DNS and web security filtering, and multi-malware protection. These features are essential for comprehensive security.

The main feature of interest to me and the customers is DNS security and Integrated Secure Web Control (ISWC).

There is a need for improved global coverage since the service relies on the cloud provider's data centers. We are seeking more granular and global coverage to meet our demands. 

Modernization is needed, specifically in the enhancement of security features and functionality. Utilizing AI-oriented features is also important, considering what other vendors offer and their marketing strategies.

According to the vendor's claims, the solution is adaptable and scalable. I would rate scalability at eight to nine out of ten.

I am not able to read their resources, but I understand they have a good support organization. This stems from their original business in networking, integrating router and switch operations, as well as security devices. I assume the same organization now bridges into customer support.

Neutral

Cisco is not well accepted in the market since they are somewhat behind their competitors.

I would rate the initial setup at seven out of ten. The commercial aspects are significant here, primarily the recognition level compared to other dedicated suppliers approaching the market with stronger messages.

I am on the presale side, and the delivery aspect is handled by other people in the organization.

Prices are determined in the Compass. I do not refer to the suggested detail or the suggested list price, however, it is highly case-oriented. In the competitive landscape, they offer some advantages with Cisco deal IDs. However, renewal prices have been surprisingly high.

They have a strong brand and are supported by Cisco's traditional organization. 

I would rate them seven out of ten overall. 

It's user-friendly and easy to manage by administrators, and the performance is very good. The security is good.

We can manage security, user channels, and all the functions on the Cisco feature, including VLAN and more. 

Cisco Secure Access have to improve the security points.

I have been using it for the last five years. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. 

There are around 200 people who use it in my company. We use firewall for WANs and Access Points is for the internal network. And there's guest Wi-Fi for guest flow.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

The customer service and support are very good. 

Positive

We plan to change Cisco with another vendor.

Cisco Secure Access is easy to install. 

It is expensive. 

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

Its performance is very good, and it's easy to manage. I will recommend it to other people.