We performed a comparison between Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client and Cisco Secure Endpoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cisco Security Portfolio solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like that it is really easy to use, it's a simple product. It can connect remotely with a secure network."
"The most valuable features are that it is really secure and very easy to use."
"Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client's most valuable feature is the ability to connect to our enterprise applications, on-premise applications, and cloud any place in the world"
"The solution provides secure and easy access to corporate network resources."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"The dashboard and interface are fine."
"The solution provides seamless connectivity to the VPN without delay."
"You don't have to think about it very much. It just works."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"The console feature gives a centralized management of what's going on, and if something happens, it gives you an alert. So, that's the most important feature for me."
"The VPN is most valuable. It's the best thing in the market today. We can use two-factor authentication with another platform, and we can authenticate with two-factor."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"The solution could offer tighter integration with endpoint protection to make it easier to use when routing security applications from other vendors."
"There are times the WiFi connectivity has disruptions and you have disconnections. It doesn't work with two connections. I have two switches back and forth sometimes. It doesn't have a failback scenario feature. However, on the gateway side, it does, but on the user device, it doesn't have that kind of option. It would be nice to have this feature."
"We'd like the product to be cheaper."
"Every two weeks there was a new version to install which was annoying for the users."
"The security could be improved."
"Sometimes when you disconnect or switch from one wireless network to another, it's necessary to re-login."
"Behavior analytics and other newer technologies should be integrated into the solution."
"The setup is a bit difficult to handle on the server-side."
"The pricing policy could be more competitive, similar to Cisco's offerings."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"Cisco is good in terms of threat intelligence plus machine learning-based solutions, but we feel Cisco is lagging behind in using artificial intelligence in its systems."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
More Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is ranked 5th in Cisco Security Portfolio with 69 reviews while Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 7th in Cisco Security Portfolio with 43 reviews. Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is rated 8.6, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client writes "A stable solution that helps users connect to resources when working from home". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Single dashboard management, quick infrastructure threat detection, and high level support". Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Check Point Remote Access VPN and Fortinet FortiClient, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. See our Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint report.
See our list of best Cisco Security Portfolio vendors.
We monitor all Cisco Security Portfolio 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.