We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions received similar ratings in all categories. However, users recognize Cisco as a worldwide, well-known, and trusted brand and they like its flexibility.
"Cisco ISE's profiling and posturing features ensure that all devices are compliant with regulatory authorities."
"The ability to allow or deny hosts onto the network is valuable. It provides great security to the network environment."
"It works as a good RADIUS server. It has lots of features. It works with all the proprietary Cisco AB pairs and features."
"One of the most important features is the authentication security for the individual connection to the network through their computer or laptop."
"Being able to authenticate wired users through 802.1X is valuable as it enhances our security."
"The user experience of the solution is great. It's a very transparent system."
"Among the most valuable features is TACACS."
"Visitors can be granted access to the wifi network using their cellphones, notebooks or tablets in a very easy way. The ease of accessibility that anyone can have to the network is very quick and is a big improvement in our network."
"I find value in notifications from CyberArk when passwords fail verification and have other issues."
"You can write different types of policies for custom business needs or any developer needs. If they need certain functions allocated, they can be customized easily."
"We utilize PTA, and we are now integrating that into our risk management program so we can identify the uses of the vault which are outside of the norm, e.g., people accessing after hours. It has reduced the amount of time that we are looking through logs and audit logs."
"It enables us to secure accounts and make sure they are compliant."
"It supports lots of requirements in the privileged access management area."
"It is an extremely scalable solution."
"We are utilizing CyberArk to secure applications, credentials, and endpoints."
"Allows secure, logged access to highly sensitive servers and services."
"The Cisco wireless controller needs to add more than one physical port."
"It should be virtualized because many people have begun migrating to the cloud. They should offer a hybrid version."
"Sometimes some of Cisco ISE's graphical interfaces could be a little bit smoother. However, with the different versions, the product is getting better and better."
"The tracking mechanism in Cisco ISE is relatively costly, especially its vendor-specific protocol."
"The UI and UX could be more seamless and easier to use."
"I don't see as many customers as I should adopting the onboarding feature. I think Cisco should make that process a lot easier and less intrusive on the end users' devices."
"A main issue is that the upgrade process, over time, is extraordinarily fragile. Repeatedly, over the past several years, when we've tried to upgrade our Cisco ISE implementation, the upgrade has broken it. Ultimately, we have then had to rebuild it because we need it."
"It is too complex. It should be easy to use. We are not such a big team. We only have three engineers to work with this, and we don't use all of the functionality of the product. Its range of functionality is too wide for us, and this is the reason why we are thinking of switching to a more simple product. We have shortlisted a Microsoft solution. We have a big footprint for Microsoft products, especially in security. As a global strategy, we try to leverage to the maximum what is possible around Microsoft."
"It should be easier to install. It is a comprehensive product, which makes it difficult to install. You need to have their consulting services in order to get it all installed and set up correctly because there is so much going on. It would be nice if there were an easier way to do the installation without professional services. I suspect they get a fair amount of their money from professional services. So, there is not a huge incentive."
"We need a bit more education for our user community because they are not using it to its capabilities."
"We would, of course, always prefer it if the pricing was cheaper."
"If you are an administrator or architect, then the solution is kind of complicated, as it is mostly focused on the end user. So, they need to also focus on the people who are implementing it."
"I'm not a fan of technical support with CyberArk. It's like jumping through red tape and hoops. Quite frankly, it's almost like when you call CyberArk you get the Help Desk or the level-one. I'm a level-one. I got the CCD, I know how to do the initial troubleshooting. When I call CyberArk it's because I can't figure the problem out. So I need a level-two, three, four. I don't need you to tell me, "Hey, open a ticket and then give me logs.""
"The scalability, sometimes, is lacking. It works really well for more static environments... But for an environment where you're constantly spinning up new infrastructure or new endpoints, sometimes it has a hard time keeping up."
"The solution needs better features for end users to manage their own whitelisting for API retrieval."
"CyberArk PAM could greatly benefit from an under-the-hood update; integrating machine learning algorithms could provide predictive insights."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 138 reviews while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security, whereas CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion, One Identity Safeguard and ManageEngine PAM360.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.