We performed a comparison between Aruba ClearPass and Ruckus Cloudpath based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Aruba has improved my organization because it supported me on my level of access."
"ClearPass' best features are authentication, support for multiple devices, and monitoring."
"What I like best about Aruba ClearPass is its 802.1X certificate-based authentication feature."
"It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It is a robust product."
"The most valuable feature of Aruba ClearPass is its ease of use and the GUI is user-friendly."
"The solution has been working well."
"It's very easy to access support and the documentation is self-explanatory."
"The ease of use is great, and the automation wizards can do a lot."
"The tool's most valuable features include the phenomenal functionality of DPSK. The ease of use, particularly when it is correctly set up, is remarkably simple. Tracking users is straightforward and dynamic. This allows us to identify where a user might encounter issues within the process."
"The solution is easy to use, well designed, robust, and has good traffic capacity."
"Ruckus technical support is very good and helpful whenever we need them."
"The solution has good features for authentication, policies, and allowing users to self-provision devices for network access via their logins."
"I find the solution to be very rich in features."
"ClearPass isn't hard to set up, but it takes a long time."
"Aruba ClearPass has fewer deployment scenarios and flexibility than Forescout."
"The pricing policy could be more flexible."
"Aruba ClearPass could improve the user interface, it is a bit chunky."
"The user interface should be improved. The logs and how the logging mechanism works can also use an upgrade."
"The implementation can improve because it is challenging to explain some of the concepts to the client."
"One area for improvement would be the possibility of using social media providers for user authentication."
"Licensing cost is extremely high."
"The solution could improve by adding more detailed information that customers have available on the dashboards."
"The hardest part we've had to deal with is trying to find some physical product recently as everything is going like hotcakes."
"The setup process is a bit complex."
"I believe the solution is missing some great features which are present in other solutions like Aruba, UiPath, and Cisco ISE."
"The tool needs to support multi-vendor environments. Currently, my experience with it has been primarily within Ruckus environments. However, I haven't explored it for multi-vendor scenarios. It would be great to see newer builds that are multi-vendor capable of full integration."
"The scalability could be better."
Aruba ClearPass is ranked 2nd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 75 reviews while Ruckus Cloudpath is ranked 11th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 6 reviews. Aruba ClearPass is rated 8.6, while Ruckus Cloudpath is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Aruba ClearPass writes "Easy to use, multifeatured, and reliable policy management platform for identity authentication and new device onboarding". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Cloudpath writes "Helps to onboard corporate users based on certificate-based authentication". Aruba ClearPass is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Microsoft Intune and macmon Network Access Control, whereas Ruckus Cloudpath is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Aruba ClearPass vs. Ruckus Cloudpath report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
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.