Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) Reviews

Our company installs the solution for clients needing remote connections to their work environments. 

The solution provides secure and easy access to corporate network resources. 

The solution could offer tighter integration with endpoint protection to make it easier to use when routing security applications from other vendors. 

The interface is minimalistic so it could be a problem for some users. 

I have been using the solution for twenty years. 

The solution is very stable and trustworthy when not monitored for periods of time. I have no worries when I step away for 24 hours and then reconnect remotely. 

Scalability is dependent on the security hardware or software appliance deployed in the environment but there are no limitations on the actual solution. Licenses are based on the number of users and can include 5,000-10,000 devices. 

I have not used support for this product but have for other Cisco products. Their technical support is the best available and I rate it a ten out of ten. 

The solution is easy to deploy once you spend a few hours planning and conducting security assessments to ensure they align with customer requirements. Deployment when customers already have Cisco Security hardware or software in place takes two or three hours with one hour of that time dedicated to installation and testing. 

Licenses are based on the number of users and scale easily. With remote work, every house functions as a small home office and the solution accommodates that scenario. Corporate licenses start at a minimum of 25 users. 

The solution is reasonably priced and costs $600 for a five-year license in our scenario. 

Our company compared the solution to Palo Alto, Fortinet, and Pulse Secure. 

We determined that Cisco was not the least expensive but was the most stable and provided the best support. 

I recommend the solution as a first choice to all customers needing a real-time product.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for our office and remote network connection.

The product is easy to use and configure.

There is a speed limit for VPNs because of the encryption. That could be improved.

The stability of Cisco AnyConnect is good.

The product is scalable. We had approximately 800 to 1200 users connecting to it.

The initial setup was easy. I could easily integrate the solution with the active directory. The deployment was relatively easy for our networking engineers to do. We have two engineers managing it.

The deployment process involves knowing the requirements, ensuring that we have integrated a VPN device with a proper bandwidth, and learning how to configure it.

It is a solid product from Cisco that small and medium-sized companies can leverage. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is used to access the company's resources remotely.

The most valuable features of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is the reliability and scalability.

The solution could improve the setup, it is complex.

I have been using Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for approximately five years.

The stability of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is good.

The scalability is good but it depends on the hardware that is being used.

We have approximately 60 people using the solution. We do not plan to increase users of this solution.

The support from Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is good.

I did not use another solution prior to Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client.

The setup of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is complex. However, once it has been done many times it becomes standard and not difficult.

The implementation of the solution was done in-house.

There is a license needed to use this solution. There are different licensing models available, such as a three-year license.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is connections. We use it to connect internally. 

We have been using this solution for four years.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is scalable and secure. We have over 10,000 users utilizing this solution in our organization. 

We do not have experience with customer service and support.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented in-house.

The solution is priced reasonably.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is very good and easy to configure, but the price could be reduced.

This solution allows our staff to be able to work from home. Our students are also able to connect to our internal network to do their work.

The solution is valuable because we need it for both use cases. Our students are our customers, and our staff needs to do their work.

The deployment of the agent software for the final customer could be simpler and more helpful.

We have been using this solution for three years now. 

The solution is very, very stable. 

It's a very scalable solution. Including staff and students, we have 9,000 users. We are using the maximum licensing they offer, and it's very affordable given the value. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. 

The deployment was done in-house and it took about one week. We didn't need any technical support, so it was perfect. 

We have yearly licensing and it's very affordable. 

My advice to those considering the product is to just do it because the solution is very good, very scalable, and very easy to maintain. I think it's a very, very good option.

I would rate this solution as a ten out of ten. 

We need Client software installed on our laptop. The Client has to be configured with the VPN server IP address. When it connects, it will provide a private IP address. It will ask for the location, and credentials will be checked on the server if the server is created with the Active Directory. It will check if you are authorized. If you are, you will be authenticated, and you will get connected to the VPN.

The best feature is the Cisco IPsec. That is the encryption. It's providing integrity for your data. 

You can use it from anywhere. You just need to have the Internet. That is the best part, the availability.

The initial setup is very simple. 

It is a stable solution. 

You can scale the product.

Every time you need to key in the credentials, it'll generate an OTP, and you need to check the OTP and need to key in the OTP. It's work to connect to VPN. That could be improved.

If you're just turning on your laptop, it should connect automatically without keying in the credentials. There should be an option to right-click and enable the VPN to connect. There might be some inherent risk, however, there must be a way to have it easier and to connect while keeping the process safe.

We've used the solution for around three or four years at this point. 

Based on my experience, the solution has been stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It is reliable. 

Cisco AnyConnect can be configured on the Cisco ASR or VPN Concentrator. There, you can have multiple contacts you can create. It is scalable.

More than 1,000 people use the solution currently.

I have never been in contact with a Cisco engineer. 

The solution is easy to set up. It's not complex or difficult. Configuring it and everything might only take about one to two hours. 

We do have to pay a yearly licensing fee. I am unsure of the exact costs. 

We are a Cisco gold partner.

I'm not really sure which version of the solution we're using. 

It is a good option for people. I would recommend the product.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for VPN purposes. 

Earlier, my teams used to use it very occasionally; however, right now, almost a hundred percent of the time, my teams are connecting over VPN and working.

It's a very good solution. My teams are currently distributed all over the globe and leading the software engineering work and for business purposes. In both cases, we found that it's a very secure solution. When we combined it with Microsoft View, it gives a multi-factor authentication, plus a few other things, which makes it quite useful when we move to this remote way of working a couple of years back. 

Depending on the business needs, it's able to scale. When we were a small team of only 20 people working remotely. We were able to use a much slower configuration, and we were able to work based on the business needs. However, once when the pandemic happened, we had to scale up. We had to put in multiple teams working and building solutions. It was able to quickly add on software storage, memory, and other resources to be able to scale it. This software is able to scale to our needs. It's pretty heavy, intensive network usage that our company does, and in the face of that, it works quite well.

I'm more of a user than an admin. For me, it is very simple to use. I just double-click and there is a multi-factor authentication that happens, and I'm able to quickly login. I integrate it easily with our active directory. Using my single sign-on for my organization, I'm able to switch a profile, and I'm able to switch to a customer's plan. It's pretty convenient in terms of usage.

It does not slow down anything, unlike other solutions. It just puts a tunnel in place.

Most organizations are using Microsoft Active Directory, and it integrates well.

They are a market leader, and their security is quite good. 

I'm not noticing any missing features. 

Most of the organizations are currently using Microsoft's Stack or Google Stack, so I don't think they need to build another product to do that.

The solution is stable. We are doing software engineering remotely and the whole day we are working. Some of my team members are working from home, and they are using it without issue.

We have 500 plus people across five continents using the solution.

The solution easily scales to meet your needs.

I've not needed technical support. We have our own infrastructure team within our organization and they're able to handle it. I've never needed actually to reach out to Cisco for their support.

I've used other VPNs like RSA and Juniper and all that before, and those are a little cumbersome. They were quite glitchy and heavy work was not possible.

I'm an end-user.

I'm not sure of which version number we are on. However, we do keep the solution up-to-date. 

Originally, we had done it on-prem. Now, we have deployed it on the Microsoft Azure Cloud.

Almost all the custom companies that I'm working with are currently using Cisco AnyConnect. These are tier one products used in military-grade environments.

I'd rate the solution around an eight out of ten. Since I started using Cisco AnyConnect maybe five years back, it's been pretty stable. 

I'd advise potential users to use it with multi-factor authentication. Just in a business environment, if you don't set it up with multi-factor authentication, it can tend to be misused. Originally, a few years back, I would see situations where multiple people were using the same VPN and sharing IDs. In the current way of work, way of configuration, it configures to your Microsoft View and actually does authentication to ensure it's a unique user. As a business with security needs, I would recommend to an organization ensures there is no VPN or ID sharing. 

We primarily use the product as a VPN. 

It is useful for connecting with the client network. We use it, and once we are connected, then we use RDC, the remote desktop, where I need to log in to production and other processes.

I'm just using it for like a Remote Desktop Connection, I'm not using it for any other purposes. For that task, it works well. 

It is stable. We haven't had issues so far. 

Sometimes if we're always having some network issues, or maybe the client is having some network issues, we might get disconnected. Other than that, it works well. 

I've used the solution for the past year. 

So far, we haven't had issues with stability. It's been good overall. 

I've never tried to scale the product. 

From my area, we have 23 people on the solution. It might be more widely used elsewhere. 

We do have plans to increase usage.

If there is any issue with Cisco, I'm going to raise a ticket with my entire team. They will take care of it. It's not my product to develop as I'm not using it in that way. I'm using it only to connect to the client network. 

Previously, I used GlobalProtect to connect to VPN. I might have used it for around four years. We switched due to the organization's policy change. 

I'm not handling the setup process. In this organization I don't have access to that. I have very limited knowledge in that area. I use it simply for connecting to the client network.

I'm not sure about the licensing cost. I'm just an end-ser. I don't handle costs. 

I don't know the exact version of the solution I am on at this time. 

I would rate the solution ten out of ten. It has worked well so far. 

I'm using Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for my home office, and for me, that's the only usage scenario for it.

Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client has improved my organization because it enables your home office or remote working, and it's a key product based on the current situation where remote working or working from home is necessary for the effectiveness of the organization.

What I like most about Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is that it's easy to use, and that is its main advantage. You can use it without the need for any setup because it's centrally pre-installed, so you just need to log in with your username and password. I didn't experience any problems with the solution in terms of losing connectivity. It works very well every time.

In terms of areas for improvement in Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, from my point of view, the solution works well and right now I don't see the need to improve it. Probably a better user interface could be created for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, but its core is VPN creation, and that works well, though I'm not a VPN specialist, and I'm not an expert on how to create a VPN, how the VPN gateway works, how it's implemented, and what's the architecture behind it.

A two-factor authentication feature was recently added to the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client. In the past, you only needed to log in with your username and password, but now, there's a token, and the user interface for that token isn't that good. That's another area for improvement. Cisco should also make the two-factor authentication better in the solution.

What I'd like added to the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client in its next release is a better two-factor authentication, in particular, the validity of the code being shorter because sometimes when I get the code and I add it to the client, it's invalid, though I'm unsure if it's centrally set up that way or if its a characteristic of the product.

Making the interface of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client more user-friendly is also what I'd like to see in the next release of the solution.

I've been using the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for eight years now.

Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client seems to be a stable solution because I didn't experience any instability from it.

I'm not sure how scalable the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is because I'm only an end-user and not an administrator.

I'm unable to evaluate technical support for the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client because I've never used support for it as I had no problems with the product.

A solution was used before going with the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, but I forgot the name of the previous solution. I'm not exactly sure of the reason behind choosing Cisco, but it could be because the older solution was a little bit complicated in terms of its licensing policy.

In terms of setting up the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, there's no need to install it in my case because it's pre-installed centrally as part of the package my company has. My team didn't waste any time on the installation because you can use it right out of the box.

In my company, the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client was pre-installed and pre-configured.

I don't have any information about the licensing costs of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client because normal users like me don't know the pricing information.

I didn't evaluate other options over Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client because as an end-user, I don't have any impact in terms of product evaluation.

I'm currently using Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, in particular, just for standard installation on workstations in my company.

In terms of the version of the solution I'm using, it's version 4.9, but I don't have any influence on which version of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client to use because it's centrally installed in the company via the system management center, but I suppose it's been updated.

My company has about three thousand five hundred users of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client. Almost everybody uses it to work from home, for example, developers, security consultants, etc. My company is a telecommunication and IT company, so just about everybody works with computers, works from home, and needs Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client.

The solution is maintained by the central end-user support team, particularly two or three people.

Currently, there's no plan to increase the usage of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client because my company has been reorganizing and letting go of some positions, and this means there's no need to increase the number of users of the solution.

I would recommend the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client to others looking into implementing it because, in my experience, it works very well and seems to be stable. I have no problems with the product. The Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is easy to use, so I'm recommending it to others.

I'm rating the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client ten out of ten.

My company is not a partner of Cisco. My company is a customer and doesn't sell the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client to customers.

We have around 500 employees working all over Qatar as well as outside - in India and Egypt. And they use to connect to our corporate network with this product.

The posturing is working well.

We have network access control. It's nice to have and easy to manage and easy to add routes, et cetera. We can easily add the route over the VPN whenever we have a new network.

The setup was simple with a little bit of assistance. 

It is easy to scale.

The solution is stable. 

It has a good web interface. 

Initially, we had an issue with the posturing, however, now it's improved. A lot of improvement can happen on this still as well. Right now, the posturing that we can do is only over the Windows update. We are considering the services. We cannot assess whether that particular update is installed or not.

The implementation can be difficult and time-consuming without help. 

We'd like the product to be cheaper. 

I've used the solution for maybe two and a half years now. 

The solution is stable so as long as we don't have any restart happening or any power interruptions.

The solution can scale. You simply add licenses. It's easy.

We have about 500 users on the solution. 

We request support from a local vendor many times. We have not lately used Cisco. The vendor is quite good. However, they are very busy, however. If we ask them for immediate support, we cannot get them. That's likely due to the fact that they're the only good technical vendor for Cisco here in Qatar.

We are using Cisco AnyConnect as well as OpenVPN.

The setup was easy. We had vendor support. The vendor support was good. The local vendor was good here. 

We spent around a week finalizing the deployment.

We have a local partner or local vendor here in Qatar. They helped us with the implementation. 

You are charged per user, unlike, for example, Fortinet. With FortiClient, you can add as much as you want. 

I can't speak to the exact cost, however. We have a procurement team that handles that.

I'm a customer and end-user.

We recently updated the solution maybe three months ago. We are on the newest version. 

It's a good solution. That said, considering the current market, it's a bit more costly than other solutions.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher if the implementation was easier and the cost was lower.