We compared Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation and Cisco Secure Workload based on our users' reviews in six categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation offers a simpler setup and advanced monitoring features, including auto policy writing and the Explorer tool. However, it lacks support for some operating systems and needs improvement in customer service and data security. Cisco Secure Workload has a moderate setup process and additional security controls with user-friendly features and helpful technical support. However, it faces integration issues and has a complicated dashboard.
"A complete and powerful micro-segmentation solution."
"Instead of proving that all the access control lists are in place and all the EPGs are correct, we can just point the auditor to a dashboard and point out that there aren't any escaped conversations. It saves an enormous, enormous amount of time."
"It's stable."
"The product provides multiple-device integration."
"Generally speaking, Cisco support is considered one of the best in the networking products and stack."
"The most valuable feature is micro-segmentation, which is the most important with respect to visibility."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is security."
"Scalability is its most valuable feature."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The solution helps to maintain logs and monitor activities. It also helps us with access management. The tool helps us to secure organizational data that include files."
"It has helped us to understand internal network visibility and firewall policy implementation. We use the product to simplify firewall policy implementation."
"The most valuable feature of Illumio Adaptive Security Platform is monitoring. When I have no requirement from the other application, I can use the web block traffic to build."
"The flexibility of the solution is its most valuable feature."
"The product provides visibility into how the applications communicate and how the network protocols are being used."
"The features that I have found most useful is the ability to centralize all the rules and then distribute them across various locations. However, I've encountered challenges related to tagging policies, which can be complex to devise. It's a matter that requires careful consideration and stakeholder involvement before implementing such policies."
"The Explorer allows you to know the traffic between source and destination."
"It is highly scalable, but there is a limitation that it is only available on Cisco devices."
"It is not so easy to use and configure. It needs a bunch of further resources to work, which is mainly the biggest downside of it. The deployment is huge."
"The multi-tenancy, redundancy, backup and restore functionalities, as well as the monitoring aspects of the solution, need improvement. The solution offers virtually no enterprise-grade possibility for monitoring."
"The product must be integrated with the cloud."
"There was a controversy when Cisco reduced the amount of data they kept, and the solution became quite cost-intensive, which made its adoption challenging….Although they have modified it now, I preferred the previous version, and I wish all the functionality were back under the same product."
"The integration could be better, especially with different types of solutions."
"I'd like to see better documentation for advanced features. The documentation is fairly basic. I would also like to see better integration with other applications."
"The interface is really helpful for technical people, but it is not user-friendly."
"It requires a low-level re-architecting of the product."
"The product’s agents don't work very well in OT environments."
"The solution is very basic and doesn't do anything other than the orchestration of layer four endpoint firewall rules."
"The customer service is lagging a bit. It could be better."
"Illumio Adaptive Security Platform could improve by supporting more operating systems. For example, Cisco and Apache appliances."
"Some of the features that can be improved is offer additional guidance on creating an effective and risk-free tagging policy would be highly beneficial."
"I would like to see better data security in the product."
"The interaction we've had with the support team hasn't been ideal. Technical support should be improved."
Cisco Secure Workload is ranked 9th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 13 reviews while Illumio is ranked 4th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 8 reviews. Cisco Secure Workload is rated 8.4, while Illumio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Workload writes "A solution that provides good technical support but its high cost makes it challenging for users to adopt it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Illumio writes "Pprevents attackers or threats from spreading or moving laterally". Cisco Secure Workload is most compared with Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, VMware NSX, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Cisco ACI and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), whereas Illumio is most compared with Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, VMware NSX, Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Zero Networks Microsegmentation. See our Cisco Secure Workload vs. Illumio report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors, best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, and best Microsegmentation Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.