Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Aruba Virtual Intranet Access vs Cisco IOS SSL VPN comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Aruba Virtual Intranet Access
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
38th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cisco IOS SSL VPN
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
SSL VPN (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Enterprise Infrastructure VPN category, the mindshare of Aruba Virtual Intranet Access is 0.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco IOS SSL VPN is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1934385 - PeerSpot reviewer
Very user friendly but configurations can be a bit complex
We use the solution to access company information via the cloud.  The solution is very user friendly.  Configurations can be a bit complex.  I have been using the solution for two years.  The solution is stable.  Technical support is very helpful so I rate them a seven out of ten.  Neutral…
Rupesh Kolhapurkar - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers easy setup phase but needs to improve connectivity
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is very user friendly."
"It is highly scalable, speedy, and reliable."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the management portal."
"The customer service and support are the best. When it comes to support, Cisco is the best vendor ever."
"It is stable."
"The product's most valuable features are security, stability, and troubleshooting capabilities."
"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."
"The product is great because it is easy and simple."
"With Cisco IOS SSL VPN, you can access your corporate data safely and securely."
 

Cons

"Configurations can be a bit complex."
"The Secure Plus Connect product could be improved with many enhancements in any price license, especially for licensing. Cisco could simplify the licensing; it could make it easier to order and use the features."
"Cisco IOS SSL VPN should improve its pricing."
"Multi-factor authentication in Cisco IOS SSL VPN has certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"The solution's configuration could be made easier."
"The flexibility of configurations could be improved."
"I think the administration can be improved to include web interfaces."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I have no notes in terms of areas of improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The product costs less."
"There are no pricing programs for non-profit organizations and the product is otherwise expensive by comparison."
"My company makes payments on a quarterly basis to the vendor to cover the licensing costs attached to the product. Cisco IOS SSL VPN is an expensive product. There are no additional costs apart from the licensing costs attached to the product."
"The solution is reasonably priced, and we have around 50% to 60% discounts from Cisco."
"The tool is expensive."
"Users have to pay a yearly licensing fee for Cisco IOS SSL VPN."
"The licensing fee is expensive."
"With Cisco, there is a free solution or a licensed version of the solution with a set of endpoint services."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions are best for your needs.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco IOS SSL VPN?
The pricing for Cisco IOS SSL VPN is based on per user. For more than one hundred users, it costs about $60 per seat.
What needs improvement with Cisco IOS SSL VPN?
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 m...
 

Also Known As

Aruba VIA
Cisco SSL VPN
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

VERISK
MST Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, OpenVPN, Cisco and others in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN. Updated: June 2025.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.