We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) 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."Having access and being able to add people or change authentication yourself is nice. In the past, we've used other group authentication services, and we always had to go to them and get permissions. Having that control is key."
"Technical support is okay."
"TACACS and .1X security are the most valuable features. TACACS acts for user control, so no one can authenticate to our network devices, and .1X is to validate that unauthorized devices are plugged into our network."
"They provide you multiple ways to achieve security, not only on-prem, but also when you have remote and guest workers. Especially post-pandemic, a lot of our customers have remote workers. So, it has been really helpful."
"The ability to integrate our Cisco AnyConnect connections to the active directory has been great."
"The way we can trust this solution is the most valuable. We have no issue with this product. It is a competitive product. You need to have a very good and deep knowledge of the product to take the full benefits of all the features, but it is a good product."
"The product is useful for device administration."
"With NAC, the profiling feature is valuable. We're able to see what we have out there in the network and dynamically assign policies to it. We can then use that to enforce TrustSec policy or anything else with NAC."
"Ruckus technical support is very good and helpful whenever we need them."
"I find the solution to be very rich in features."
"The solution has good features for authentication, policies, and allowing users to self-provision devices for network access via their logins."
"The ease of use is great, and the automation wizards can do a lot."
"The solution is easy to use, well designed, robust, and has good traffic capacity."
"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 configuration is complicated for setting the infrastructure. They have improved over the years but there is still a lot of room to improve. When comparing the simplicity to other vendors, such as Fortinet and Aruba they are behind."
"The web interface needs improvement. The new web interface that they have is not as easy to manage and we find it to be very slow."
"On the network services devices, when you click on filter, the filter comes up. However, when I type in a search and I want to click on something it defaults back to the main page. I keep having an issue with that, and I'm not doing anything wrong."
"Since we have started, we struggled a lot to implement this solution into our network, and we opened a case a couple of times. Up until this point, nothing else needs to be improved with this product."
"In the next release, I would want to see this kind of solution in the cloud as opposed to on prem because when enhancements are made to the software, if it's in the cloud, it's overnight. I mean you're not going to have to respin the servers that the license sits on, it's all microservices kinds of things in the cloud. That would be my recommendation. If I'm a customer, that's what I'm looking at - for cloud based software subscriptions."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"I don't like the fact that we can see the logs only for 24 hours. Maybe that happens because of the way we set it up."
"An issue with the product is it tends to have a lot of bugs whenever they release a new release."
"I believe the solution is missing some great features which are present in other solutions like Aruba, UiPath, and Cisco ISE."
"The solution could improve by adding more detailed information that customers have available on the dashboards."
"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 setup process is a bit complex."
"The hardest part we've had to deal with is trying to find some physical product recently as everything is going like hotcakes."
"The scalability could be better."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 137 reviews while Ruckus Cloudpath is ranked 10th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 6 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Ruckus Cloudpath is rated 8.0. 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 Ruckus Cloudpath writes "Helps to onboard corporate users based on certificate-based authentication". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Ruckus Cloudpath is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) 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.