We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Portnox CORE 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."The interface is pretty easy to use."
"For customers, it's great. It has a GUI, so the customers themselves can edit ACLs or even modify the policies. It's also an all-in-one solution with RADIUS and TACACS."
"The ability to integrate our Cisco AnyConnect connections to the active directory has been great."
"One of the advantages is that you can easily find rogue endpoints. For example, if you don't want to allow any endpoints where you don't know the people plugging into what kind of devices, ISE can give you a big, clear picture, e.g., what kind of endpoints are getting connected to your network. That is one of the advantages."
"The features that do work, work well, and we use it on a daily basis."
"The return on investment we have seen is related to time in terms of troubleshooting. The logs, such as the security logs, inform us of the issues that people have had. ISE has been very instrumental in helping isolate those issues. We've seen a lot of cost savings because we don't have to pay an IT person to waste time doing something that should be instantaneous."
"The most important feature for us is visibility in terms of user connections. It's the ability to see what devices are online for a particular user that helps a lot with our troubleshooting."
"It is stable and easy to use."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"There is an add-on feature for application control to kill unwanted applications when launched on a user's device."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"The technical support is top-notch."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"I am impressed with the solution's voucher capability and authentication. The tool is integrated with Active Direct storage."
"Profiling is a really good feature. However, it sometimes is a challenge for customers when there are issues with the remediation part. I would add a built-in remediation solution. That would be a very nice feature."
"The tracking mechanism in Cisco ISE is relatively costly, especially its vendor-specific protocol."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"There are always some things that I would request."
"The admin interface is really slow. It's horrible."
"The policies could be adjusted to make them more easily implementable."
"It would be nice if it could be configured easily by default."
"There are still some bugs in ISE that need to be worked out."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"The price could be better."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"The integration between Portnox CORE and Portnox CLEAR can be better. These are two different systems, and there is no unique console for both devices. Portnox CORE is agentless, whereas Portnox CLEAR is not agentless."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 136 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 11th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Portnox CORE 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 Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, whereas Portnox CORE is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Portnox Clear and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Portnox CORE 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.