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

Cisco Secure Access vs Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

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
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
5th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), ZTNA as a Service (7th)
Cisco Secure Access
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
6th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
3rd
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (11th), ZTNA (6th), Domain Name System (DNS) Security (2nd)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
4th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
1st
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (5th), ZTNA as a Service (2nd)
 

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 Cisco Secure Access is 3.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 11.8%, down from 17.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks11.8%
Cisco Secure Access3.6%
iboss2.3%
Other82.3%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Kartik Amin - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
IgorPinter - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at PULSEC
Zero-trust access has improved remote security and now simplifies cloud-based firewall management
Regarding the integration part for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, the integration with identity providers is pretty much good. It is basically firewall as a service, so it performs well. I completed the integration without any issues. What Palo Alto Networks can do better for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is probably to have the point of presence available in more locations. The point of presence from the Serbia region has the nearest POP in Frankfurt, which is an issue since it is your gateway—when you start browsing the internet, you go through a commercial connection in Germany. They definitely need to spread the service in other countries.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"My experience is that Cisco has been in an area where there have been many different solutions for security, and now they are converging, but they are moving into more of a 360 view, and I have more or less everything in the same platform, so Cisco is moving in the right direction."
"Cisco Secure Access has had a positive impact on protecting our organization from threats such as phishing and ransomware."
"Cisco Secure Access has helped my organization significantly, especially when we went through a cyber event and lost all our previous remote access, and we were able to get Cisco Secure Access up within seven days and roll it out to all our people to get everybody back online."
"I find the zero trust approach helpful and beneficial in securing standard applications, which means you are accessing the applications directly instead of giving privilege to access the network itself."
"Cisco Secure Access has protected our company against threats such as phishing or ransomware, as we have seen it successfully address various cybersecurity vulnerabilities."
"The product is giving whatever you need from a customer point of view."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Access is the level of security it provides."
"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."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to join your network and provide access through the VPN."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to change the gateway. For example, if there's a problem with a specific region or vendor, we can make modifications. The solution is scalable, and there are different gateways that can be created depending on the demand."
"Prisma Access provides comprehensive security. It provides URL filtering, application control, SSL, DLP, etc. It provides complete security for the cloud environment."
"The valuable features are that it is easy to use, easy to integrate, and is stable; it's scalable as well."
"I would recommend Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks as it is really good, but it would be much better if the pricing were lower so that I could provide cloud firewall services instead of physical firewalls to customers."
"Its frontend is user-friendly. It is easy to use for us."
"This is the best product that I have looked at, out of all of the competitors."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"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."
"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."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"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."
"Cisco is not well accepted in the market since they are somewhat behind their competitors."
"Cisco Secure Access can be improved with more integration; the more integrations, the better. There are always third-party products that you might have, such as Carbon Black."
"For pricing, I consider this one of the few drawbacks of Cisco; Cisco is known for its high pricing, so I would give them a six."
"I have had experience with customer service and technical support already. It was not very good because we always have to escalate to engineering with our problems, so the TAC cannot help us."
"I am not using the AI assistant feature of Cisco Secure Access much yet. I think it is a little bit limited right now."
"Cisco Secure Access is stable and reliable if certain features are not used. Initially, SSL decryption was enabled, where certificates are decrypted, and when that was turned on, the performance was very unpredictable, plummeting significantly."
"When you have planned works in your data center, I think you need to carry out some post-checks to ensure we are not affected as users."
"We are using the SaaS offering. We use our applications for microservices. We use Twistlock to scan containers, and it displays these results in Prisma, which is a good feature because we can see vulnerabilities with respect to these containers. We can see everything in a very detailed manner. However, when you have different environments for a single application, such as DEV, QA, PROD, and TEST, all these environments run multiple containers, which can lead to a very high number of containers. In such a scenario, it shows you the alerts for all those containers that have vulnerabilities. If you show the results of all the containers that share the same image, it is not going to add any value. Therefore, they should narrow down the alerts based on a container. It should show information for a single container. Otherwise, the person who is looking at the results gets the impression that he has to fix all these issues. This is something that they can improve."
"If I had to rate Prisma Access for ease of use, I'd give it two out of ten. It's easy for the users, but it's difficult for admins to configure."
"Sometimes a third-party outage could impact the whole operability."
"They could add more flexibility and improve product performance."
"It is a managed firewall. When you run into issues and have to troubleshoot, there is a fair amount of restriction. You run into a couple of restrictions where you don't have any visibility on what is happening on the Palo Alto managed infrastructure, and you need to get on a call to get technical assistance from Palo Alto's technical support. You have to get them to work with you to fix the problem. I would definitely like them to work on the visibility into what happens inside Palo Alto's infrastructure. It is not about getting our hands onto their infrastructure to do troubleshooting or fixing problems; it is just about getting more visibility. This will help us in guiding technical support folks to the area where they need to work."
"It applies commits to the firewalls slowly. There isn't an API you can use for anything. We've previously had trouble with the egress IP addresses though we expressed to engineering that those mustn't change. They changed several times without warning, causing a lot of headaches."
"One area for improvement is for them to stay on top of keeping their CVEs on their platform up to date."
"Better integration with the MDM solution would be useful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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 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."
"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."
"Based on what I have heard from others, it is a pricey solution as compared to its peers, but I am not sure. However, considering the features that it offers, it is a break-even point. You get whatever they are promising."
"In terms of pricing, considering that it is a two or three years old solution, they should apply big discounts for the next two or three years. This approach will be better for them to capture the market."
"It is a little expensive. Because it is one of the best in the market, it is a little bit more expensive than other vendors."
"Prisma is in the middle of the road. It's not the most expensive, but it's not the cheapest. There aren't any additional costs, to my knowledge. I know they have some extra modules, but we didn't use them."
"This is not an expensive product and everything is included with one license."
"The licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis and for what we get, the price is good."
"It is pretty expensive. We have to balance the cost of some features. They need to work on some of the services and products, price-wise."
"I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Construction Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise27
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
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...
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...
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 ...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?
Cisco Secure Access has many features, and I want to clarify whether the discussion pertains to Cisco ISE or the Cisc...
What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Secure Access?
Cisco Secure Access always requires monitoring for updates and signatures, similar to a health check, but not intensi...
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What do you like most about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
From my experience, Palo Alto is more expensive compared to solutions like Netskope and Triscale.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
No data available
Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Prisma Access, GlobalProtect, Palo Alto GlobalProtect Mobile Security Manager, Prisma SaaS by Palo Alto Networks, Prisma Access
 

Overview

 

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.
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
Concord Hospital, State of Colorado, Essilor International, RheinLand Versicherungsgruppe, University of Westminster, Universidade Nove de Julho, SPAR Austria, CAME Group, ZipRealty, Greenhill & Co., IKT Agder, Aviva Stadium, Animal Logic, Management & Training Corporation, Brigham Young University Hawaii, School District of Chilliwack
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Access vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.