We compared Cisco Identity Services Engine and Fortinet FortiNA (ISE)C based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Cisco ISE seems to be the slightly superior solution because of its expansive integration capabilities.
"Cisco offers automation, visibility, and control as well as third party integration capabilities."
"The solution is very reliable."
"It does what it's supposed to. We use a certificate-based authentication method for corporate-managed devices. That means when a user walks in with their managed laptop and plugs it into the network, it chats with Cisco ISE in the background, allows it on the network, and away they go."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility element, the ability for customers to be able to see what devices are actually on their network. Without a solution like ISE, they would have no idea what devices are connected to their network. It offers them the ability to authenticate devices via mobile."
"It's easy to change and add policies."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for each access request, no matter the source. It's also very effective at helping with the distributed network and at securing access."
"The integration with Active Directory is the most valuable feature for us."
"There are a lot of integrations available with multiple vendors. This has made the solution easier to work with."
"This solution is very easy to implement and use. The interface is user-friendly."
"With FortiNAC, we don't need to configure the mass client site or access points. For example, we don't need to configure the switching site for a client's site. With Persistent Agent, it makes it much easier."
"The FortiNAC features I found the most valuable are security and the ability to consolidate wireless networks."
"Compared to other NAC vendors, Fortinet’s user interface is more user-friendly."
"Compliance checks are a good feature. Compliance check is for windows updates and for antivirus updates, etc."
"It is a good product."
"Provides containment and security and and carries out file analysis for cyber theft."
"The most valuable features are the ease of deployment and ease of use."
"One of the issues that we used to have was with profiling because we're working with a service provider that uses a lot of bring your own devices."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for every access request. We have had a little bit of a challenge with profiling, but we are probably about 80% there."
"Third-party integration is important, as well as the continuous adaptation feature which is the AIOps. It would be helpful to include the AIOps."
"There are issues with respect to the posture assessment function. It's been observed that customers are not receiving total access to the network because the assessment agent is glitchy and malfunctions from time-to-time. I would like to see refining of the compliance assessment and adding more detailed compliance of endpoints on the user end."
"The support could be faster and the pricing could be reduced."
"The licensing documentation needs to be better."
"In a future release, I would like to see network access control. That is something that customers seem to be looking for."
"The tracking mechanism in Cisco ISE is relatively costly, especially its vendor-specific protocol."
"The GUI is a little bit strange — different than other Fortinet products."
"Fortinet FortiNAC could improve its hardware for use with cloud-based firewalls."
"FortiNAC could improve integration with other vendors."
"Fortinet FortiNAC's device compatibility could be improved, particularly for VoIP devices."
"The platform must enable troubleshooting."
"The reporting can also use improvement."
"They need to change or upgrade the technology in the product."
"This solution could be more agile."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 138 reviews while Fortinet FortiNAC is ranked 3rd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 44 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiNAC is rated 7.6. 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 Fortinet FortiNAC writes "I like the solution's native integration with other devices from the same vendor". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security, whereas Fortinet FortiNAC is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiClient and Portnox CORE. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Fortinet FortiNAC 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.