We performed a comparison between Aruba ClearPass 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 most valuable feature of Aruba ClearPass is the ease of deployment and integration with other equipment in the network."
"The most valuable thing about Aruba ClearPass is its ease of use. It has always been a very reliable and very stable policy management platform."
"Stable with good QBT technology."
"The most valuable features of Aruba ClearPass are the GUI and its ease-to-do configuration. Additionally, we can troubleshoot many things in one window."
"ClearPass is effortless to use and configure. It's not hard to learn the tool, and it has lots of features."
"Aruba ClearPass has improved the security control in our network environment."
"A lot of the issues in Forescout are mitigated in Aruba ClearPass, it supports all the expected protocols."
"What I like most about Aruba ClearPass is that it has the best enforcement feature for the network. I also like its Guest Captive Portal and virtual security enforcement features, but the virtual security enforcement feature is still under testing by my company. Aruba ClearPass also has a wonderful UI which I find valuable."
"It's a stable product."
"Previous to the deployment we didn't have complete visibility of all the endpoints, all the devices that are connected to the network. But with the deployment of portnox, we could see all the devices and where they're connecting. We can equally segregate and apply different rules, policies to each location that we didn't monitor specifically."
"It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"For the information security team, the security level was improved because it helped to manage and prevent rogue devices from connecting to the corporate network. The reporting was granular, and reports we scheduled for delivery on Portnox were useful during investigations and audits, especially in cases where the IP address changed."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"I remember our technical team stating that the installation front of the solution was a bit difficult when compared to other solutions."
"The user interface could be more polished and modern. It would be useful to have more options for automation."
"The GUI of Aruba ClearPass could improve, it is not user-friendly."
"In the future, I would like to see plugins for AI and machine learning."
"The licensing model could be improved."
"There is room for improvement in terms of scalability."
"I would like to see better integration with the firewall for zeroing out blacklisted users."
"Lacks the ability to handle more than one certificate for both the management process and the Captive Portal."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"The price could be better."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"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 solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"It could be a little cheaper."
Aruba ClearPass is ranked 2nd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 75 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 12th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews. Aruba ClearPass is rated 8.6, while Portnox CORE is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba ClearPass writes "Easy to use, multifeatured, and reliable policy management platform for identity authentication and new device onboarding". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". Aruba ClearPass is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Microsoft Intune and Sophos Network Access Control, whereas Portnox CORE is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Portnox Clear and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Aruba ClearPass 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.