Cisco IOS SSL VPN Reviews

Currently, I use Cisco IOS SSL VPN to VPN in, but not with high frequency. We use Cisco IOS SSL VPN as our VPN client to connect to our network.

This is for health.

The valuable features of Cisco IOS SSL VPN are the ease of use and the speed. It is pretty fast and easy to use.

Cisco IOS SSL VPN definitely helps with our efficiency as it is one of our primary VPN solutions.

Cisco IOS SSL VPN helps with maintaining security.

I have not found any areas that could be improved so far.

I am not sure how Cisco IOS SSL VPN can continue their improvements for the future, but I think it is a great product.

To stay on top, they probably need updates to this product. I do not know what kind of improvements these updates are offering. It is a great product so far.

I have more than 5 years of experience with this product.

I would say Cisco IOS SSL VPN is extremely stable. I have not had any issues in the past, so I would say it is most stable.

I am not sure about the scalability of Cisco IOS SSL VPN as I am not managing the backend of that.

I believe we have enterprise level scalability.

I am not dealing with Cisco support, so I cannot evaluate their customer service or technical support.

Positive

I have no idea if the initial setup was straightforward or complex.

I do not know how long it took to deploy or the team that was involved with that.

I am not sure about the pricing of Cisco IOS SSL VPN.

I am not dealing much with Cisco.

I do not quite understand the question regarding operational impact.

I am not sure if Cisco IOS SSL VPN supports any kind of artificial intelligence or network management enhancements or if it utilizes AI.

I am not sure about any additional features that would be nice to see in Cisco IOS SSL VPN. As far as usability, it already has everything we need. It supports different platforms and multi-factor authentication, so it does the work.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Cisco IOS SSL VPN a ten.

I did a lot of the ManageEngine tools and have extensive experience with different ManageEngine tools that we used at Mueller Industries for many things. Once you open that can of worms with ManageEngine, you end up using a lot of their tools.

The main use case for the ManageEngine Applications Manager for APM and observability has been to manage and secure applications on site when I was at Mueller. It's been about 2 years now since I used that tool while still investigating it at the airport.

Optimizing and configuring for network segmentation is the biggest thing for helping with segmenting traffic management.

Configuring QoS on Linksys is pretty easy, especially compared to Cisco QoS, which I am certified in, as it helps ensure that the bandwidth for voice or other applications doesn't bleed over into the data links.

In the past, Linksys has been pretty good at network protection, segmenting off that protection for unauthorized access or cyber threats.

Cost savings and ease of use are the benefits I've seen from Linksys. It's a little bit less complex to set up and configure compared to Cisco switching.

I utilized the VLAN support feature in the Linksys switches. A lot of the networks I have were broken up by VLAN, and I definitely configured them for different VLANs.

The best feature of Linksys in my opinion is cost, as they tend to be more cost-effective compared to larger switches or Cisco switches.

It's hard for me to say how Linksys could be improved. I can't think of any specific improvements needed.

I believe Cisco could support easier configuration and having tools that allow for easier management and configuration, as Linksys switches are a little bit easier to manage and set up compared to Cisco switches.

I have had about two to three years experience with CyberArk. I set up the CyberArk servers at my old job and installed and managed CyberArk for a couple years.

They are not as stable as a full-blown Cisco switch. I believe Linksys is stable depending on the environment.

Linksys can be fairly stable for easy environments, but in more complex network environments, Cisco is definitely a lot more stable.

The support for Linksys has improved and gotten better over the years. When Cisco first took over, it was a bit more difficult to get support, but they now integrate it without differentiating the support for Linksys versus full-blown Cisco switches.

I would rate the support for Linksys an eight.

Positive

When I was at the Memphis Airport, I had more recent experience with a tool that we went to at Mueller Industries when we stopped using CyberArk. The management of CyberArk was a little bit complex compared to other tools keeping it up and running because of the configuration requiring multiple servers to run it, which became too much and too expensive, and there were other tools that were easier to manage.

ManageEngine is one of the tools that I switched over to from CyberArk in the last 12 months.

I did not have experience with any of the ManageEngine products in the last 12 months, as I am with Castilla Loma College now, which doesn't use any of those tools.

Linksys is definitely really easy to set up and get in place.

I find the recovery time on HPE switches is a little bit quicker. They start up and restart faster as far as configurations, and they are a little bit more flexible for transitioning from simple environments to more complex networking.

I have experience with firewalls, and as far as Cisco goes, I'm Cisco certified; however, I didn't really have a lot of experience with Palo Alto, mostly just SonicWall and Cisco.

I mainly used Cisco switching and some routers and firewalls, ASAs, and things like that. I am familiar with the Linksys Ethernet switches.

I have used Linksys switches in the past, but I don't use them in my current environment. At Castilla Loma College, we are using HP switches.

Previously, at Mueller Industries, we had a few Linksys switches, and with some of my small clients in my IT support company, there were a few of those that had Linksys, but it's not a whole lot though.

I don't focus as much on networking as I used to, but I can say that using Linksys is advantageous for environments where you don't have to pay for a full-blown Cisco switch, which is more cost-effective for certain clients and environments.

I would recommend Linksys for simple LAN environments or where there are not many VPN connections or complex networking, while more complex environments should use Cisco.

The energy efficiency of the switches has not been significant or caused any issues, as we've never had any energy issues or failures even during power loss trying to run off of UPS.

Overall rating: 8 out of 10.

Neutral

I use the solution in my company as it serves as a VPN solution for handling the proxies.

The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.

There is a need to increase the features of the product so that it can provide users with full access to the network. It would be good if the product were able to provide users with specific application access. In our company, we open all of our networks for users, but we can't open a specific application network or separate applications with VPN.

The product has some connectivity issues, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Cisco IOS SSL VPN for four to five years. I am an end-user of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Around 1,00,000 people use the tool in my company.

My company plans to increase the use of the product. During the COVID-19 period, the product was regularly used in a full-fledged manner. After our company's offices started to work, there has been a decline in the use of the product.

There is a different team in my company that handles the technical support offered by Cisco.

I don't know about the deployment process since my company's IT personnel deployed the tool on our machines.

The product's setup phase was easy.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The deployment was done through SSL, so there was no need to indulge in any steps since its user must create one setup or package and then deploy it on the machine.

The solution can be deployed in a few minutes.

Two or three people from our company are enough to take care of the deployment and maintenance of the product.

The product was deployed with the help of our company's in-house team.

It is an expensive product.

For our company's remote workforce connectivity, the tool was very useful during the COVID-19 situation. In general, the VPN functionality offered by the product was very useful during the COVID-19 situation.

In terms of the product's ability to secure third-party access, the tool works very well.

The most valuable feature of the product in terms of network security stems from the fact that the tool provides access to the whole network, and even if users give access to some special applications, it is still really helpful.

The clientless access feature is not available for clients. My company installed the product for its clients. If the product offers a clientless access feature, then it is okay and can be very helpful for our company.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it. Cisco IOS SSL VPN is a reliable product.

The product is very helpful for a work-from-home setup as the tool can be used to access our company's internal network, which Falls outside the network of our organization.

I rate the tool a seven to eight out of ten.

We use the solution for hospitality projects. We use a network infrastructure to deliver multicast streams for IPTV.

The multicast feature is useful for us. It's the only feature that is necessary for us on the network.

The configuration must be improved. It is complicated. We need to have a Cisco engineer for configuration.

I have been using the solution for a few years.

The tool is very stable. We have redundancy to ensure that the service can be delivered every time.

The tool is scalable. We have an average of 250 to 300 users in a hotel with 100 rooms.

There is a major Cisco partner in Switzerland. We have had a very straight contact with them for 20 years.

If it's a normal hotel in Switzerland with 100 rooms, it would take us one week to deploy the product.

The tool is expensive.

The network is not on our end. We work on existing hotels. The hotels already have networks. We only add a service with a virtual line. We have had other partners like HPE and Huawei. We use the stackable switch.

If we decide to add more ports to scale, we add the switch to the stack. We have a certified engineer to operate the customer network. Our choice of solution depends on our customers’ decisions. Generally, 80% of our networks are Cisco-based. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I use the solution whenever I'm not using my office Wi-Fi. I switch on the VPN to connect to any Wi-Fi outside my work location. I have to use my username and password from my work. The solution is used for security. I work for the HR department. We have a lot of confidential organizational data.

A few days ago, I was trying to convert a PDF into PPT, but I could not do it on my work laptop because it had confidential information and I was on VPN. The VPN warned me that the document had confidential information about the organization and that I could not upload it on an external server. That's how the solution protects the organizational data for security purposes.

The solution is pretty fast. It is easy to download and easy to use. I just have to put in my username and password to use the security feature. It always gives a warning. It helps me because I don't want my manager to know if I'm using confidential information outside work. The warning helps me stop the task I am performing. I use Microsoft applications like Teams, Outlook, and OneDrive to collaborate at work. I can use the applications on my laptop when I'm on VPN.

Sometimes, the product does not connect with the Wi-Fi. It usually does, but sometimes, if I'm using another Wi-Fi apart from my work Wi-Fi, it does not connect. It shows some error. If I have to work in a remote location, it gets difficult. When it happens, I have to restart the computer. The performance is not always effective. The performance could be improved.

I have been using the solution since July last year.

The tool is quite stable. Once I connect to a network, it rarely gets disconnected. Sometimes, it doesn't get connected from the get-go. However, when it gets connected, it's quite stable.

The tool is pretty scalable. The organization that I work for has millions of employees. There are 50,000 in my batch alone. Everyone uses the solution.

I contacted technical support when I faced issues. The support team helped me out on the same day.

It was pretty easy to install the product. It took one to two minutes. I had to go to the website, search for Cisco VPN’s free version, and download it. To install it, I required the username and password from the IT department in my organization. I don't have the access to download or install a program. The IT personnel provided the username and password, and I was able to download the file. When I ran the file, I could go through the installation wizard. I had an icon on my desktop and the taskbar when it was downloaded. It requires my username and password every time I click on it.

The solution keeps my data safe. It protects me from malicious downloads and unauthorized uploads. It's pretty easy and fast to install and use. It doesn't take up much of my laptop’s RAM. My laptop does not get slow while using the solution in the background.

The solution is pretty easy to use. My recommendation depends on what purpose someone wants to use the tool for. If someone wants to use it for work purposes, it's quite good. It warns and protects us from viruses or sharing confidential information outside the organization. I use the tool for free as an employee of my organization. I have used other VPNs only on my mobile phone. Those tools were better at connecting to the network. Cisco is the second-best product I have used. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

It provides a secure way for remote users to connect to the corporate network without the need for additional client software.

With a secure remote access solution, our administrators can efficiently manage data center tasks from anywhere. The value for money in this scenario is evident when considering the time-sensitive nature of data center maintenance. Having secure remote access minimizes downtime and the associated costs compared to the alternative of physically bringing in administrators during an outage.

It is highly scalable, speedy, and reliable. Its primary function is to provide specific clients with data center network access, and it consistently meets this top requirement. We've never encountered any issues where registered users couldn't perform necessary tasks over the VPN.

We faced difficulties with the automated renewal of a client certificate, resulting in a manual deployment in one instance. Enhancing the client certificate deployment process could be a valuable improvement, ensuring smoother and more reliable certificate renewal experiences in the future.

I have been working with it for seven years.

We've encountered power failures, and remarkably, the service remains uninterrupted. In situations where one node experiences a power failure, the other seamlessly takes over.

Our user load is minimal, consisting of only eight users who are administrators for the data center. The solution is already well-scaled for our current user base, so scalability hasn't been a consideration. There's no immediate requirement to scale further at the moment.

Tech support has been a challenging yet highly effective experience for us. Our company invests in top-tier support services, specifically the Cisco Technical Assistance Center. As a result, we are part of the highest level of support, allowing us to create tech cases and receive assistance. I regularly collaborate with Cisco Tech, and my overall experience with their support has been consistently positive, with interactions occurring almost weekly.

Positive

We also implemented Check Point solution, but it was a more complex phase. Unlike Cisco VPN solution, Check Point lacked the flexibility to integrate with our existing identity stores, requiring all users to be local.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The deployment process took a week, involving the acquisition and firmware upgrade of physical devices. Configurations included setting up a clustered operation, linking to identity services (e.g., Active Directory or RADIUS), and defining failback mechanisms. Nodes were assigned roles (active/passive), and identity sources for client storage were determined. An IP subnet for client assignments was established, and thorough testing ensured the setup's functionality. We handled the maintenance with a team of two individuals – one administrator and one manager.

There are two main components in our pricing structure, iOS licenses and licenses for the device itself. Additionally, there's the purchase of user licenses based on the required number of users. These two types of licenses, along with the essential support, constitute the overall cost. It stands as the priciest solution available in the market.

I would highly recommend it as it is stable and straightforward to set up, delivering on its promises. In the IT business, these are key qualities that most people seek in a solution. Knowing that a product not only offers certain features but also excels in implementation is crucial, and in this regard, Cisco has proven to be highly effective. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

The people who implement the solution are from the operations team in our company. My team is called the planning and solution team in our company, which looks after the initial planning and designing of deployment, and then later on, the deployment is taken care of by a different team.

Cisco IOS SSL VPN usefulness varies according to purposes and depends on your solution. Cisco IOS SSL VPN can be useful for cases involving site-to-site VPN, client-to-site VPN, or single access office network.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that the solution works fine, but I can't comment more since I am not from the operations team, because of which I cannot provide data based on what the end user prefers.

I would like Cisco IOS SSL VPN to provide a faster connection. In my company, we also would like to receive better resolutions to any of the issues we face while using Cisco IOS SSL VPN since we deal in huge numbers. We also use Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client in our company.

I have been using Cisco IOS SSL VPN for eight to ten years. I use the solution's latest version.

Stability-wise, it is a very good solution.

Scalability-wise, maybe a few hundred users use the solution in our company.

I cannot comment on whether my company plans to increase the usage of the solution. The department that handles the documentation related to the solution will be given the projection related to any expected changes in the number of users. In our company, we have a manager to discuss the aforementioned areas.

The interaction with the solution's technical support is an ongoing process in our company, and they are pretty good.

The initial setup of Cisco IOS SSL VPN is such that once we have decided about the initial setup, we consider the devices in our company, after which the setup phase gets completed in a couple of days.

The solution is deployed for our company's employees and all the other internal users.

The steps involved in deploying the solution involve certain internal processes in our company, where we discuss the limitations and different features of the solution.

In my company, we have been using Cisco since 2004. I recommend those planning to buy the product to go ahead with their purchase decision.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

I use Cisco IOS SSL VPN in my company. Though it is a complex product, it is flexible and shares similarities with one of the products I have experience with, so in general, I feel it is a good solution. The tool is very easy and user-friendly to use.

In our company, we saw that clients who use VPNs require almost the same or common functionalities from any product. The use cases are more related to the location of the clients because Cisco is a vendor that serves mostly clients or customers in the USA. In the European market, our company uses more of Fortinet. Our company does many Cisco installations in the USA.

The most valuable features of the solution are not something that the VPN clients of my company simply experience. I appreciate that with Cisco, if you need some documentation, solution, or supply, there are many people who can provide some information.

From my perspective, Cisco has a history of problems with the area of web filtering, because of which my company sometimes had to change the vendor and the appliance. The aforementioned area needs to be considered for improvement in the product. Previously, in our company, we used Trend Micro, and later, we switched to another solution. In our company, we changed many vendors in the last ten years. If you want to implement a solution, you need to follow the new implementation procedure, so from VIX to IM, there are many changes.

In general, the pricing of the product should improve, and it should be made easier to deploy.

I have experience with Cisco IOS SSL VPN.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

In terms of stability, the tool doesn't offer users enough reach.

The scalability of the solution is very good.

More than 1,000 people use the solution in my organization as it is a product meant for enterprises.

The solution's technical support is very good. There are no issues with the technical support team. When you want help, you can contact the technical support team, and there are many support team members available to help you.

The product's initial setup phase was complex because of the more granular nature of the process.

The time required to deploy the solution varies because the area involving the deployment of the firewall could be very easy and can be completed in an hour. If you deploy a firewall solution for a big company, maybe you can reach 6,000 rows of configuration, so time is needed. There are some configurations with just 1,000 rows. With Cisco, one may have to take care of just 100 rows of configuration.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

One manager and one engineer are required to take care of the deployment and maintenance of the product.

I used a software extension for the product's deployment.

With Cisco, there is a free solution or a licensed version of the solution with a set of endpoint services.

Those who plan to use the solution should test it before implementing it in their environment. I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

I use Cisco IOS SSL VPN to work from home remotely.

The split panel functionality is much better in the Cisco IOS SSL VPN than in the Aruba VPN.

The solution's graphical user interface is not very user-friendly. I assume that Cisco IOS SSL VPN has a better VPN client, which works better on Windows 10 or Windows 11 machines. Our clients struggled with the solution's VPN client on Windows 7 machines.

I have been using Cisco IOS SSL VPN for three years.

Cisco IOS SSL VPN is a very stable solution. I rate Cisco IOS SSL VPN ten out of ten for stability.

Cisco IOS SSL VPN is an easy-to-scale solution. Around 500 to 600 users are using the solution in our organization.

I rate Cisco IOS SSL VPN ten out of ten for scalability.

Cisco IOS SSL VPN's initial setup was easy. We just had to apply some certificates and use the Aruba switches with the VPN.

We have seen a return on investment with Cisco IOS SSL VPN.

Cisco IOS SSL VPN is more expensive than the Aruba VPN, but it is worth the money.

Overall, I rate Cisco IOS SSL VPN a nine out of ten.