Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) Reviews

The setup is quick and easy on the client-side.

Overall, the solution is quite good.

The solution has the capability to integrate with other solutions.

The solution needs to add more options for clients.

There are too many VPN endpoints. It's not easy to switch between endpoints, which affects scalability.

It's difficult to change profiles. There are no menu buttons or checkboxes to make simple changes on the solution. It would be very simple to just add something in the menu to make account changes quick and easy.

The setup is a bit difficult to handle on the server-side.

I've been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable enough.

The scalability needs to be dealt with. The endpoints on the solution are an issue. The solution should change some of the VPN endpoints.

On the client-side, the setup is very straightforward. However, on the server-side, it gets a bit more complicated and users should be aware of that.

Our company outsources our services to our customers. We use many different technologies, and, from my experience, overall I find this solution to be quite good.

I'd rate it eight out of ten overall.

We primarily use the solution for an SSL VPN, for third parties to connect to our network.

The pricing is very competitive.

The solution is very easy to use and set up.

Configuring the solution could be simplified. You tend to spend a bit of time on it right now. It could be made easier with better UI. All of the backend configurations are command-line and it's not helpful. It takes a little bit of effort to get the system up and running.

There's a lot of newer technologies that are displacing all of the VPN technologies. The solution could benefit from having a defragmenter and should offer Mac-based device control. 

Behavior analytics and other newer technologies should be integrated into the solution.

I've been using the solution for three years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We've had about 2,000 users connected to it. We use it quite extensively.

A different team handles technical support, however, I haven't heard of any issues.

The initial setup was pretty simple. It's not too complex.

We had a hybrid approach to implementation where we did a few updates and then had a third party deploy the basic items for us.

The solution offers its services at a very reasonable price.

I'd recommend the solution; it's a good product.

I'd rate it eight out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution as an access point. We have on-premises servers and if anyone needs to access those servers remotely, they access them through Cisco AnyConnect.

We use it as a VPN between outside networks and our internal office network.

The most valuable feature is the connection feature. It allows me to connect.

There are situations where the connection drops, and you may not even be aware of it until you try to do something critical. The reconnection feature can be improved.

In the next release, I would like to have a connection alert or a pop up that could tell you that you have been disconnected.

It would be an improvement to include a better interface and integration with other vendors.

There are instances where the connection is very poor, but It may have something to do with our network. I am not sure.

This solution is scalable.

We have twenty to thirty users.

We have not contacted technical support, we have not had any cause to contact them.

Previously we did not use another solution, this is the first one.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We did not use any external resources to implement this solution, it was done internally.

This solution is very good, but if you don't know what you are doing, you could create issues with it very quickly. If you don't have enough knowledge regarding this solution, then you need to get someone who knows this solution to help you with the implementation or to implement the solution.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for working remotely.

It's a simple and reliable solution.

From my point of view as an end-user, it works without any problems and it's easy to use.

I have been working with the same interface for the last ten years. I would say that it needs some improvements made. From the perspective of an end-user, It could be more attractive and a graphic interface would be better.

It's a problem having to balance the number of licenses with the number of physical users.

In the next release, I would like to see better graphics in the interface.

This solution is stable. There have been no technical issues.

I use this solution on one computer and there is no way to expand on it as an end-user for one computer. On the administration end, it may be different. 

I have not contacted technical support. I haven't had any issues, the setup was good, and the software doesn't seem to be complicated, so there hasn't been any reason to contact technical support.

I have has some issues with the connectivity, but it has nothing to do with the product, it is with the network connectivity with specific networks.

Previously we used CheckPoint Endpoint Remote Access VPN.

For a standard end-user, CheckPoint VPN is more complicated. It could be because it has more functions.

The initial setup was done by the Central Administrator.

All that I can say, is that when I received the computer it was working and I had no issues with it. It was set up well by the administrators.

Sometimes there is a problem with the number of licenses for the end-user.

The number of concurrent users is limited due to a valid license.

I use this product on a day to day basis.

Take into consideration the appropriate ratio between the real number of users and the concurrent number of users. That was my experience when I was responsible for the remote working solutions for business continuity. 

I would recommend this solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is to connect external users to our research center.

The deployment model is on-premises.

It is easy to handle, you can have it on Windows, Mac, and Linux. It is quite useful.

Often, there are new versions to install and that can be annoying for our users. 

Having to deal with a new version every two weeks is a bit overdone.

It would be useful to have an automatic install process where if you connect and you don't have the latest version, it should be automatically done.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable.

In most cases, we are satisfied with the technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We did not use a vendor or integrator, we did it by ourselves.

We do not have a personal relationship with Cisco. We are customers.

This is a solution that I would recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use the on-prem deployment model. Our primary use case is to connect external users to our research center. 

It's easy to handle. You can have it on Windows, Linux or Mac, which is quite useful.

Every two weeks there was a new version to install which was annoying for the users. 

The price should be lower. 

It is stable. 

It is scalable. 

Technical support is good. We are satisfied. 

The initial setup was straightforward. 

We deployed it in-house. 

I would recommend this solution to someone considering it. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to access of the information for our company: email, documents, etc.

I like how I don't need to see the solution or start it up. I just use my computer and have it working in the background. I start my laptop and it's there and working. That's the most important feature.

The hotspots give me connectivity issues occasionally. It could be easier to use if it allowed me to choose the hotspot.

The solution is stable.

Technical support is handled through our IT department. They're very good.

We previously used a different solution. It came from the IT department but it wasn't very stable. They changed the VPN to AnyConnect and now it works well.

The initial setup was easy. You just install it on the computer and it starts working.

Our IT department handles the implementation.

We didn't evaluate other options before choosing this solution.

We use the private cloud deployment model.

I'm satisfied with the solution. I'd recommend it to others.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for infrastructure security for accounts.

I like that it is really easy to use, it's a simple product. It can connect remotely with a secure network.

The interface could be a little more modern looking and it would be nice for other users if it had easier integration.

Another point of improvement is that it is easy to forget that you are in a private network and it does not log you out automatically. I did not see that there is an option for that. It should log you out after a certain point. You can forget that you are browsing a private, local network. The logout should be automized and it should have a reminder that you have logged in into a private network.

I never have stability issues.

It is probably well scalable. I have not scaled it for more people so I don't have experience with that.

I have never needed to contact their technical support. 

I have not used a different VPN provider.

I have installed it on my PC and I did not have to connect all the IP addresses and stuff but the setup was simple. 

I would recommend this solution to anybody considering it. I think it is a good product. 

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use them for our clients to connect to the servers.

I like the ability to share the connections or simply to be able to pass the credentials for a connection to other colleagues without bothering too much about the connection being tracked or about security. Each and every user will require a secret password, so I don't really care about sending the details. It's very secure.

Sometimes I need to connect with Cisco AnyConnect and I don't have access to a Windows machine, so I need to run the client from a Linux machine. If I recall correctly, the last build for the Linux was five or six years ago. So, sometimes it happens that I have this issue with not being able to use Cisco AnyConnect just because I'm forced to use a Linux machine, and the client is very old and it doesn't connect to the current version they're running on the servers on which I want to connect, even though it should be compatible with the old version I have.

It's not really an issue from our side, though, because at the end of the day I always find the solution of connecting through a Windows machine but this requires at some point to connect through the VPN. I connect a Linux machine to a Windows machine, the Windows machine to one in the AnyConnect lines product just to connect to yet another Windows machine, which in turn I need to connect on a Linux machine, because in most cases, the actual servers around the world, the vast majority of them are running on Linux.

If they could simplify connections via other machines, like Linux or Mac OS X, it would be helpful.

It's quite stable. It is seldom disconnected. If I recall correctly it happened to us last year on several occasions while using it, it tended to disconnect. But the product is very stable. 

In terms of scalability, I cannot comment because I only hear from the clients. I don't hear from the server-side.

I would recommend this solution to anyone who is considering its implementation.

I would rate this solution between a seven and an eight out of ten.