We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."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."
"They have recently made a lot of improvements. My clients don't have much to complain about."
"The WiFi portal in Cisco ISE is very useful for WiFi customers."
"The solution enables us to do everything from one interface."
"The integration with Active Directory is the most valuable feature for us."
"One of the most important features is the authentication security for the individual connection to the network through their computer or laptop."
"It integrates with the rest of our platform, like our firewall, and helps us a lot. It also does a good job establishing trust for every access request."
"Authentication is the most valuable feature because it puts our company at another level of security."
"Initial setup was pretty straightforward."
"I like Tenable.sc's analytics and reporting. You can also configure your on-prem network monitors to talk to your Tenable.sc control panel."
"Very customizable with a lot of templates."
"Has a great advanced scanning feature."
"This solution has a much lower rate of false positives compared to competing products."
"Feature-wise, Tenable Security Center is a very fast tool with many dashboards and reports, and it covers all our systems."
"Tenable's most valuable features are the credential scan, vulnerability reports, and vulnerability ratings (VPR)."
"The scanning part, the agent part – that's the valuable aspect."
"We do tend to run into a lot of issues with ISE when it comes to bugs."
"Cisco ISE is very complex and not very easy to deploy."
"They should improve their licensing. Licensing is always trouble with Cisco, and Cisco Identity Services Engine is no different. The way the product is licensed could be improved."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"The templates could be better. When you have to do certs, especially with X.500 certs, it isn't very intuitive."
"A lot of people tell you the hardware requirements for ISE are pretty substantial. If you're running a virtual environment, you're going to be dedicating quite a bit of resources to an ISE VM. That is something that could be worked on."
"Cisco ISE does not recognize devices and that is an issue we faced during its integration with our existing devices."
"There are still some bugs in ISE that need to be worked out."
"The user interface can be improved."
"Its reporting can be improved. It is not easy to generate a scan report the way we want. The data is okay, but we can't easily change the template to make it look the way we want."
"The solution's user interface has some issues."
"Though the solution's technical support is responsive, they do take a lot of time, making it one of the solution's shortcomings that needs improvement."
"We are facing some challenges related to our channel."
"The solution is expensive."
"We would like to see the inclusion of external IPs and simplified reporting that's easier to deal with"
"The product should provide risk-based vulnerability management."
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 Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. 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 Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai.
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.