We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Forescout and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."It's easy to change and add policies."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the policy sets."
"When we use ISE, one of the helpful things is that I can go through the dashboard and get every step along the way of how a device was authenticated. If it's failing, why did it fail? Why is it unauthorized? If there's an error, what is the error and how can I fix that error? If it's something that, if they should be passing, why are they failing?"
"The most valuable feature is the provisioning of the device so as to ensure that they are compliant with the security policy that we need to have."
"It provides client provisions and profiling as well as guest access."
"RADIUS is the best feature because it supplies authentication to our entire campus."
"The ability to allow or deny hosts onto the network is valuable. It provides great security to the network environment."
"Easy to use and provides good support"
"Integration between our departments has been the most valuable."
"Microsoft Mobility and EMS include Intune for Mobility, which provides mobile device management and mobile application management. With mobile device management, you can control the entire device in an organization."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution is scalable."
"The solution is very good at securing files. For example, if I forward a secure document, it's blocked from others, as I can send it with restrictions in relation to who can open it."
"The product is centralized and we can use it for security purposes."
"You can scale the solution up or down by department."
"A good feature that is present is MAM or Mobile Application Management. We can deploy this feature on the device, which is not managed by the organization. If I apply some security configuration on a personal device, the user would be really disappointed. What we do instead is that we give all access to the applications related to corporate and ask the users to use the application. We secure the application by putting the security features on the applications and not on the users' devices. This way, the users are happy, and we also meet our company's compliance standards. Then, everyone is happy."
"Automation [is an area for improvement]. It seems like everywhere I look, automation is super important. Automation and integrations. That's the area it could be improved..."
"There should be more visibility into TrustSec policy actions. When TrustSec blocks something or makes any kind of changes to the network, we don't always see that. We have to log into the switch itself, or we have to get some type of Syslog parsing to do that."
"The user interface could be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"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."
"Cisco ISE could be simplified somewhat. I would also prefer certificate-based authentication over confirmation-based authentication for all the processes. It's possible for us to do a workaround, but the process needs to be simplified."
"I'm working from China currently and the only real issue is that, within the country, there's some concern around Cisco and its ability to offer the solution for the long term. As the United States has banned the Huawei version in their country, we feel there may be retaliation in ours and Cisco will get banned as a countermeasure from the government. The future of Cisco in China is in question. Our local partners are worried about the situation."
"I would like to see them simplify the dashboard. It's very configurable, but, at the same time, it's not easy to maneuver through it. They should "Merakify" it."
"Cisco ISE can become quite complex, especially with policy sets, the entire authentication process, and everything involved."
"There are certain shortcomings in the licensing model of the product where improvements are required."
"We did the deployment with the help of Microsoft's consultants. But sometimes, we found it difficult to educate the application developers to integrate."
"Technical support could be improved. Sometimes they use a third party that's not so knowledgeable in the product and that can slow down things a bit."
"Its performance needs enhancement."
"The MDM part of the engine could be better."
"Microsoft's feature management is based on licenses. Microsoft follows ethical licensing and hence do not restrict the use of it."
"The licensing is quite expensive."
"The auditing and reporting could be updated and upgraded. I would like to see light applications because they consume a lot of the device's memory at present."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is ranked 10th in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 10 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is rated 8.4. 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 Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security writes "Seamless integration and easy implementation ". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and SailPoint IdentityIQ, whereas Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is most compared with Microsoft Intune, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, ManageEngine Endpoint Central and Cisco Meraki Systems Manager (MDM+EMM).
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.