NAC vs ASA Built-in Feature

mcroft — Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:09:44 GMT

Hi,

I am looking a secure solution for around 25 users - to remote access into our datacentre.

Obvioudly a secure tunnel is needed (SSL/Ipsec), BUT ALSO, i want a solution to provide 'posture assesment' of sorts.

Now, NAC is very expensive for this small type of smallish network.

I have been looking at the ASA55** feature "Pre-Connection Posture Assessment" with the Cisco Secure Desktop :-

It offers "Host integrity verification checking seeks to detect the presence of antivirus software, personal firewall software, and Windows service packs on the endpoint system prior to granting network access."

I think this is PERFECT !!

Can anyone please tell me how this differs from NAC and would it survice ??

Thank you.

P.S I intend to use the IPS module too, to ensure data passing the ASA will be "scrubed" clean.

Re: NAC vs ASA Built-in Feature

Farrukh Haroon — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:06:34 GMT

The Cisco Secure Desktop feature is only available with SSL VPNs, and not with IPSEC. If you plan to use ONLY SSL VPNs then CSD is a reasonable solution for small setups.

For IPSEC endpoints you need to go with NAC.

Regards

Farrukh

topic Re: NAC vs ASA Built-in Feature in Network Security

NAC vs ASA Built-in Feature

Re: NAC vs ASA Built-in Feature