Axis Security vs Cisco Secure Access comparison

Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Cisco are both solutions in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category. Hewlett Packard Enterprise is ranked #15 with an average rating of 10.0, while Cisco is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.4. Hewlett Packard Enterprise holds a 1.8% mindshare in SASE, compared to Cisco’s 3.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Hewlett Packard Enterprise 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

Axis Security and Cisco Secure Access compete in the secure access technology category. While Axis Security is recognized for its pricing and support, Cisco Secure Access is preferred for its robust features.

Features: Axis Security is known for advanced remote access, a zero-trust architecture, and efficiency in enterprise security needs. Cisco Secure Access provides integration capabilities, threat protection, and extensive API support, making it suitable for users seeking a comprehensive security suite.

Room for Improvement: Axis Security could enhance customization options, expand integration capabilities, and address customer service responsiveness. Cisco Secure Access users express a need for a streamlined setup process, reduced complexity, and faster deployment time.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Axis Security offers straightforward deployment, though some users find its customer service limited. Cisco Secure Access has a more complex deployment requiring skilled IT resources but is noted for robust customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Axis Security is valued for competitive setup costs and ROI benefits in secure access. Cisco Secure Access, despite a higher initial investment, is seen as offering justified long-term returns and comprehensive security value.

To learn more, read our detailed Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,644 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 June 2026, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.3%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Axis Security is 1.8%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Access is 3.7%, up from 1.9% 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	3.7%
iboss	3.3%
Axis Security	1.8%
Other	91.2%

Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.

Read full review

Robert Oglesbee

Solution Architect at Visionworks of America

Easy to deploy, improved reliability and performance of our connectivity, and greatly reduced costs

Atmos is good for securing infrastructure from end to end, detection and remediation of threats, but there may be a few features that could be added to make it a little easier for networking and security folks to analyze the traffic. There are bad actors out there and they may or may not show up through the tool. That's something they can add. They need to improve the networking and security tools a little in the troubleshooting and "bad-actor" areas to help us analyze security threats a little better. They have some things built in, but I would like to see more advanced tools. There are major vendors out there, and if you use their VPN connection that's not going to help you without buying one of their other products. So that's a similar type of situation. However, they do give you a little more bang for the buck when it comes to monitoring. So I can see an improvement there, in Atmos, in the future.

Read full review

reviewer2788500

Network Operations Engineer at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees

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

"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."

"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."

"The iboss solution gives me the ability to scan the traffic through all the ports, through all the 131,000 PCP and UDP ports, and with this ability, we have the granularity also for consults over social media and applications on mobile, and this is an advantage that the customers are looking for right now."

"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."

"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."

"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."

"Its initial setup was straightforward."

More iboss pros

"The entire suite and the entire ZTNA process are very valuable."

"I would give it an A-plus for securing access to our applications, devices, and network. It does an extremely good job. Our security folks have analyzed it and tried to find loopholes, but they found none."

"I rate Axis Security ten out of ten."

"The most valuable aspect is its ability to restrict unauthorized access, ensuring that only approved devices can connect to the network. T"

"The way the access connectors work is valuable."

"The most valuable part so far has been Axis Security's ability to create identity connections to various servers, allowing users to access them. By doing so, we've managed to replace any old or existing VPN access with Axis Security. We are slowly but surely getting rid of our traditional VPN."

"Cisco Secure Access provides application-level access, removes the dependency of VPN, and user authentications are continuously based on identity, device, and risk, which is an add-on there."

"The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Access is the possibility to work from anywhere, along with the posture for the host, so the check on the posture."

"The main feature of interest to me and the customers is DNS security and Integrated Secure Web Control (ISWC)."

"I believe Cisco Secure Access is the best option on the market at the moment; it is the right and recommended choice."

"The biggest benefit of Cisco Secure Access, compared to Fortinet or other solutions from Palo Alto or Prisma, is its adaptability to different network environments."

"Cisco Secure Client is really efficient for all the users and mostly for the enterprise, so I would say Cisco Secure Client would be the primary one."

"The most valuable feature is the authentication feature."

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

More Cisco Secure Access pros

Cons

"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."

"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."

"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."

"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."

"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."

"The endpoint-type solution is an area that needs some improvement."

"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."

More iboss cons

"I would like more statistics about what's going on in terms of usage. There is little-to-no usage reporting. That's one thing we've requested, and I think they're working on it."

"I would appreciate more automated learning capabilities or increased integration with other security tools, allowing us to establish automation."

"I would like more detailed logging in the Axis Security interface."

"There should be a notification alarm with geofencing."

"They need to improve the networking and security tools a little in the troubleshooting and 'bad-actor' areas to help us analyze security threats a little better. They have some things built-in, but I would like to see more advanced tools."

"The support team should be more skilled in offering assistance."

"The licensing is confusing."

"From a licensing perspective, there could be some enhancement."

"I would assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Secure Access as having the worst thing about it being the VAs and their requirement of a full reinstall anytime something unusual happens to them if they go stale or any such thing."

"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."

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

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

"The only bad experiences we have had were really sort of when the platform launched and I think even Cisco was still learning how to support it."

"Having been associated with Cisco for more than fifteen to twenty years, I find it increasingly difficult to get tech support these days. Although Cisco is reliable, the process to raise a support ticket has become more complex, requiring specific user accounts and access to specialized platforms."

More Cisco Secure Access cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

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

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

"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."

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

"The pricing is very competitive from what I've seen."

"The pricing is quite fair. It's better than what we gave up, which was Cisco AnyConnect."

"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."

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

"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

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

10%

Retailer

Comms Service Provider

University

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	27
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	34

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for iboss?

We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?

I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Axis Security?

Axis Security is affordable. While I cannot provide financial specifics, we have never had complaints about pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Axis Security?

There should be a notification alarm with geofencing. When a person is at the gate, a notification alarm should alert...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Axis Security?

We monitor access for individuals who log in and out, as there are codes we log in with. The code is generated by an ...

See all answers

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

Pricing for Cisco Secure Access has been very reasonable in the context of the entire world of SASE solutions. Setup ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?

Our main use case for Cisco Secure Access is providing security for hybrid and mobile workforces. One of the big chal...

See all answers

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

One of the things about policy verification is with Cisco Secure Access and modern security products in general, poli...

See all answers

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Lightspeed Filter vs iboss

Compared 2% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Axis Security

Compared 15% of the time

Cisco Security Cloud vs Axis Security

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs Axis Security

Compared 7% of the time

FortiSASE vs Axis Security

Compared 5% of the time

More Axis Security Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 16% of the time

FortiSASE vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

Netskope vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 9% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 6% of the time

Barracuda SecureEdge vs Cisco Secure Access

Compared 3% of the time

More Cisco Secure Access Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

June 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Axis Security

June 2026

Download Axis Security product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Access

June 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

Axis Security provides secure and seamless access to cloud infrastructures with features that support both modern and legacy applications, enhancing connectivity and performance.

As a leader in secure connectivity, Axis Security simplifies access management with its easy deployment and configuration. It integrates directly with Okta for single sign-on and replaces traditional VPNs, ensuring trust for access requests while restricting unauthorized access. Its interface combines Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) and secure web gateway functions into one, offering a unified approach for managing secure connections across platforms including Azure, AWS, and Google. Users find its reporting capabilities beneficial for access analysis, supporting multiple protocols to establish secure connections effortlessly.

What are the most important features of Axis Security?

Easy Deployment and Configuration: Streamlines access management.
Secure Connectivity: Direct integration with cloud providers like Azure, AWS, Google.
Single-pane Interface: Combines ZTNA and secure web gateway functions.
Single Sign-On: Okta integration enhances seamless access.
Access Analysis: Comprehensive reporting features aid security insights.

What benefits or ROI should users look for?

Enhanced Security: Replaces VPNs and restricts unauthorized access.
Improved Performance: Reduces latency with seamless global infrastructure access.
Protocol Support: Supports multiple protocols for flexible connectivity.

In the biopharma industry, Axis Security enables entities to manage infrastructure access, safeguarding proprietary data and meeting compliance. Insurance subsidiaries use it to monitor access across retail environments, while cloud deployments help secure network devices against unauthorized access and manage code generation for site monitoring and authentication.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise

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.

Cardenas Markets, Armis, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Visionworks

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

Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access

June 2026

Free Report: Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access

Find out what your peers are saying about Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Axis Security vs. Cisco Secure Access report.

See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors, best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors, and best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.