We compared Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Cisco Secure Workload based on our users' reviews in five categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: In comparing Akamai Guardicore Segmentation to Cisco Secure Workload, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation has a straightforward setup process and offers flexibility in creating network security zones. It is stable and provides good coverage for older operating systems. However, it may face challenges in supporting large organizations and lacks agentless options. On the other hand, Cisco Secure Workload has a moderate setup process and offers additional controls in security scoring. It is user-friendly and provides a comprehensive solution. However, it may have integration issues and a complex dashboard. The pricing for Cisco Secure Workload includes a hardware cost. Both products have received positive feedback for their customer support, though Cisco Secure Workload's support is considered stronger for networking products.
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"The product offers great visibility into the network so we can enforce security measures."
"The most valuable feature is micro-segmentation, which is the most important with respect to visibility."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don't have to do packet captures on the network."
"A complete and powerful micro-segmentation solution."
"Secure Workload's best feature is that it's an end-to-end offering from Cisco."
"Instead of proving that all the access control lists are in place and all the EPGs are correct, we can just point the auditor to a dashboard and point out that there aren't any escaped conversations. It saves an enormous, enormous amount of time."
"Scalability is its most valuable feature."
"Generally speaking, Cisco support is considered one of the best in the networking products and stack."
"Supports become difficult when it's for a big organization. For a small organization, medium organization, it still makes sense, however, for a big organization, it makes life difficult."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"The multi-tenancy, redundancy, backup and restore functionalities, as well as the monitoring aspects of the solution, need improvement. The solution offers virtually no enterprise-grade possibility for monitoring."
"It is not so easy to use and configure. It needs a bunch of further resources to work, which is mainly the biggest downside of it. The deployment is huge."
"They should scale down the hardware a bit. The initial hardware investment is two million dollars so it's a price point problem. The issue with the price comes from the fact that you have to have it with enormous storage and enormous computes."
"The product must be integrated with the cloud."
"Secure Workload is a little complicated to use, and the dashboard isn't intuitive, so it takes a while to learn how to use it."
"The emailed notifications are either hard to find or they are not available. Search capabilities can be improved."
"There was a controversy when Cisco reduced the amount of data they kept, and the solution became quite cost-intensive, which made its adoption challenging….Although they have modified it now, I preferred the previous version, and I wish all the functionality were back under the same product."
"The integration could be better, especially with different types of solutions."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 3rd in Cloud and Data Center Security with 17 reviews while Cisco Secure Workload is ranked 9th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 13 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Cisco Secure Workload is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Secure Workload writes "A solution that provides good technical support but its high cost makes it challenging for users to adopt it". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Microsoft Defender for Cloud, whereas Cisco Secure Workload is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Cisco ACI and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine). See our Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Cisco Secure Workload report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors, best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, and best Microsegmentation Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.
