Appgate SDP vs Cisco Secure Access comparison

Appgate and Cisco are both solutions in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category. Appgate is ranked #20, while Cisco is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.4. Appgate holds a 1.6% mindshare in SASE, compared to Cisco’s 3.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Appgate users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Cisco users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

Appgate SDP and Cisco Secure Access compete in secure access technology. Cisco Secure Access seems to have the upper hand due to its extensive feature set and long-term value.

Features: Appgate SDP offers a flexible security model with strong integration capabilities and user-friendly adaptability. Cisco Secure Access features robust security policies, extensive integration options, and advanced control management, giving it superior comprehensive protection.

Room for Improvement: Appgate SDP could improve scalability, implementation simplicity, and advanced configuration speed. Cisco Secure Access needs better technical support response times, simplified advanced configuration, and reduced deployment complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Appgate SDP is recognized for straightforward deployment and responsive customer service. Cisco Secure Access, while complex to deploy, also offers strong customer service, though the initial complexity may be a barrier to simple deployment.

Pricing and ROI: Appgate SDP is favored for competitive setup costs and positive ROI with a lower initial investment. Cisco Secure Access has higher upfront costs due to advanced functionalities but offers long-term value and appeals to users needing extensive features.

To learn more, read our detailed Appgate SDP vs. Cisco Secure Access Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Appgate SDP vs. Cisco Secure Access

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

iboss

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.3%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Appgate SDP is 1.6%, down from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Access is 3.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Access	3.6%
iboss	2.3%
Appgate SDP	1.6%
Other	92.5%

Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851

Managing Director

Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment

I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.

Read full review

IgnitiusMolepo

Senior IP Network Defense at MTN

Helps us manage traffic-related issues and streamlines access management for the network

Appgate SDP has significantly streamlined our access management, providing a notably efficient solution compared to traditional VPNs. The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort, unlike VPNs which often involve waiting for connection handling and unblocking. Recognizing the robustness of SDP, we made strategic decisions to minimize reliance on VPNs, reserving only two for administrative purposes. In a scenario where Appgate SDP significantly improved our network security posture, the platform played a crucial role in fortifying defenses against major threats. The encryption algorithms utilized by SDP provide a high level of security to our network architecture. Compared to Cisco, SDP proves to be most critical in protecting resources with the help of role-based policies. It only provides selective access to the application. The dynamic policy engine significantly enhances our access control mechanisms. It has single sign-on and multifactor authentication features. It makes processes faster and easier. It has helped our IT team to manage the workload with ease. It gives an intelligent solution whenever they face traffic-related problems. I rate it a nine out of ten.

Read full review

Kartik Amin

Network Operations Engineer at Redex IT Limited

Secure access has unified zero trust and web protection while AI assistance automates tasks

From a feature perspective, I have not experienced any issues, drawbacks, or shortcomings. However, the cost of Cisco's products and licensing is high. My clients usually prefer cheaper options if possible. Mid-size or smaller businesses typically cannot afford Cisco Secure Access. Additionally, there is a steep learning curve, as it is very intensive. Someone with significant knowledge can work on it, but a new professional would have to spend considerable time to get accustomed to it. It is hard to find engineers who can work on it. Overall, we get what we pay for, as it is a pretty good feature and service. The pricing of Cisco's products and licensing is higher than competitors. If they could be more reasonable, that would help. The support offered for two years also has higher costs. Overall, the client's IT budget gets affected. It was challenging to learn because, as mentioned, it has a significant learning curve and requires considerable training to become proficient.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."

"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."

"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."

"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."

"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."

More iboss pros

"The interface is really friendly. It's simple to understand."

"One of the most important features is stopping lateral movement across our network."

"It is a scalable solution...The support answers your questions very fast."

"It is pretty stable."

"The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort."

"The flexibility of the tool is valuable. It is very robust. It has a very robust configuration capability."

"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."

"Any tool that provides telemetry through logging is a particularly good fit for us because we have to really automate our monitoring."

"I would say that over the last 15 years, Cisco Secure Access is the best solution for remote access because I work with other companies as well, but Cisco Secure Access is the best one."

"After implementing Cisco Secure Access, I observed complete automation, a complete Zero Trust architecture, and complete automation of security."

"The features I have mentioned benefit our company overall by giving us one single pane of glass, where we can see all the rule sets, and our end customers appreciate having one single control point of the network."

"I find the posture checking feature of Cisco Secure Access the most valuable."

"I use this solution for securing security controls like Secure Security Control (SSC) for local Internet breakouts."

"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."

More Cisco Secure Access pros

Cons

"The reporting feature needs improvement."

"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."

"Its pricing could be better."

"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."

"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."

"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."

"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

More iboss cons

"They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features to enhance remote micro connection."

"One thing that kind of sticks out to me is the ability to do a proper non-split tunnel. VPN tunnel-wise, it is not really a true unsplit tunnel, but I think that's just because of the way it's designed. A split VPN basically allows your system to talk to other systems without being forced down the tunnel. A VPN running in a non-split tunnel mode forces all the traffic down the tunnel to wherever you're VPNing to. It forces the traffic down so that the traffic is subject to the firewall and rules that you have in your corporate environment and such. It helps to prevent remote malicious folks that may be talking directly to that box from piggybacking into the corporate environment through it. They do it partially, but it would be nice to see more of an enterprise-level solution there."

"It would be better to connect to an application portal from any device. Documentation and support could be better."

"On the cloud, when you make some changes, it may be difficult."

"The user interface should be improved as it is not very easy to work with the updates."

"One limitation is that it's harder to provide access to multiple applications in the company with Appgate, but that's probably because of poor management."

"TAC engineers just exit the call once their shift timing ends."

"Cisco Secure Access has impacted our help desk ticket volume and end-user experience because sometimes users encounter issues. Since we have many features activated, users sometimes cannot connect or attempt to connect multiple times, which generates service desk tickets."

"Cisco Secure Access could be improved with fewer bugs; we need to address less software bugs, as there are technical issues and errors in the software, which we are trying to resolve to achieve a more stable version that companies can use without issues, but it is a working process, and we understand this."

"There is a need for improved global coverage since the service relies on the cloud provider's data centers."

"From a licensing perspective, Cisco can improve."

"I'm not sure of the improvements. From my point of view, it was the right decision to go to that platform."

"The Talos database is insufficient because Cisco Secure Access web gateway database is not big enough to hold every URL, leading to numerous problems with URLs not being categorized correctly and a slow turnaround for recategorization requests."

"My experience with the Experience Insight feature, called DEM, is not good. I find the integration between Cisco Secure Access and ThousandEyes does not work well and does not deliver what it is supposed to."

More Cisco Secure Access cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."

"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."

"We pay $100 per user per month. One license for the site is around $17."

"The pricing is according to the market price. It is not a very cheap solution. They have some very aggressive promotions to sell the product in the market."

"It is a pretty expensive tool. It is maybe about $20,000 per year for a hundred users or so."

"For what you get, it's a fair price in comparison to other products."

"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."

"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."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	3

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	27

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Access?

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access is that it is part of our security ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?

Cisco Secure Access serves as a replacement for customers' old VPN solutions while increasing security through Zero T...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Secure Access?

The AI access feature of Cisco Secure Access is really interesting. I do not think it is really there yet; the produc...

See all answers

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cloudflare One vs iboss

Compared 3% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Appgate SDP

Compared 7% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Appgate SDP

Compared 6% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs Appgate SDP

Compared 6% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Appgate SDP

Compared 3% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Appgate SDP

Compared 3% of the time

More Appgate SDP Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 26% of the time

Netskope vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 7% of the time

Absolute Secure Access vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 2% of the time

More Cisco Secure Access Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

March 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

ZTNA

February 2026

Download Appgate SDP product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access

March 2026

Download Cisco Secure Access product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Appgate SDP is a network access control tool for local and remote access, multifactor authentication, and micro-segmentation. It is a flexible, robust, and configurable tool with good documentation, interface improvements, and ease of deployment.

It helps organizations prevent lateral movement across networks and servers and provides a more granular access control structure than traditional VPNs. Appgate SDP's valuable features include the ability to hide servers, good support, stability, scalability, and stopping lateral movement. It is currently being used as the main VPN solution for many companies.

Appgate

Cisco Secure Access is a comprehensive Security Service Edge (SSE) solution (a key component of a SASE solution) that addresses the complexities of securing a hybrid enterprise. Cloud-delivered and grounded in zero trust, it delivers a unique blend of user simplicity and IT efficiency for frictionless, secure access to all applications—SaaS (with gen AI), private apps, and the internet—regardless of user location or device. Secure Access protects users, data, and devices against relentless, sophisticated, and constantly evolving threats including AI-driven attacks and identity breaches.

Provides all core SSE components (ZTNA, SWG, CASB, and FWaaS) plus extended capabilities.

Includes VPN-as-a-Service (VPNaaS), data loss prevention (DLP), AI Assistant, visibility/control/guardrails for generative AI use, digital experience monitoring (DEM), reserved IP, remote browser isolation (RBI), DNS-layer security, flexible security enforcement (in cloud or on-premises), policy verification, and more.
Protects users as they seamlessly access resources and apps with no extra steps needed, regardless of protocol, port, or level of customization
Simplifies IT operations through a single client, single dashboard, single license, and unified policies.
Lowers risk with least privilege, granular controls backed with unmatched threat intelligence of Cisco Talos.
Eases interoperability with other products from Cisco and third-party vendors with common administrative controls, data structures, and policy management.

Robust integrations

Integrates with Cisco Identity Intelligence to protect against the startling increase in identity-based attacks.
Integrates with many SAML Identity Providers (IDPs) such as AD, Azure AD, Okta, Ping, etc.
Integrates with Cisco offerings including SD-WAN, Splunk, XDR, Thousand Eyes, third party technologies such as Menlo RBI, Chrome Enterprise Browser, and AppOmni for SSPM.

Cisco

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.

United States Air Force FINRA Weight Watchers Rackspace DataDog SageNet Verdant Norwegian Cruise Line VoiceBase The Third Floor

1. IBM 2. Microsoft 3. Amazon 4. Google 5. Apple 6. Cisco Systems 7. Oracle 8. Intel 9. HP Inc. 10. Dell Technologies 11. Verizon Communications 12. AT&T 13. Comcast 14. T-Mobile 15. Sprint 16. Vodafone 17. Orange 18. BT Group 19. Deutsche Telekom 20. Telefonica 21. Nokia 22. Ericsson 23. Samsung Electronics 24. Sony 25. Panasonic 26. LG Electronics 27. Siemens 28. General Electric 29. Ford Motor Company 30. General Motors 31. Toyota Motor Corporation 32. Volkswagen Group

Buyer's Guide

Appgate SDP vs. Cisco Secure Access

March 2026

Free Report: Appgate SDP vs. Cisco Secure Access

Find out what your peers are saying about Appgate SDP vs. Cisco Secure Access and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Appgate SDP vs. Cisco Secure Access report.

See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors, best ZTNA vendors, and best ZTNA as a Service vendors.

We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.