We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and ForgeRock 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)."I love the policy sets, they are really nice and dynamic."
"The most valuable feature is the ASDM - the user interface makes it very easy to configure the firewall."
"I like the logging feature."
"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."
"After the product was installed, no one could access the secure connection network. In order for any laptop or any endpoint device to attach to my network, it needs to be authorized or be certified to be connected."
"Using this solution gives us the ability to allow proper access to the network."
"The implementation is very simple."
"The interconnection with the ecosystem and the ability to force rules all over the network are the most important features."
"ForgeRock products are customizable, and the out-of-the-box features are solid, too. I primarily use the OIDC compliance features. It's just a configuration. it's easy to set up and customize trees. We can add our own features if necessary. Banks and corporations have different standards and specific validations."
"The most valuable features of ForgeRock are social login and data protection."
"The support is good and prompt."
"We have found the identity and access management tools in the solution to be particularly useful for our organization."
"The solution integrates well and it is important for them to keep up with the current trends in the market quickly enough, and they have been doing a good job at it."
"I like the way it is handling authentication and authorization."
"This is a stable solution. When you do experience any issues, you will see it in your DB logs or audit logs so you can easily reach a conclusion of might be causing it."
"We used it to implement multi-factor authentication and to improve our security posture as well as reducing the potential for attacks."
"They should improve the documentation. There tends to be a lot of old text, or the new things aren't always up to what's been released on the code, and sometimes the documentation is inconsistent."
"One of the issues that we used to have was with profiling because we're working with a service provider that uses a lot of bring your own devices."
"Cisco ISE has almost all the features we are looking for now, but sometimes the configuration, such as the conditions, is a little difficult to understand and not so easy to navigate."
"Difficult to figure out the protocols and nodes in order to implement correctly."
"The interface could be more user-friendly and the ability to apply rules to MAC addresses, for example, if I wanted to allow a certain MAC address access at a particular time I cannot make this adjustment."
"There should be a single button that can be pressed to dismiss all of the alarms at once."
"Compatibility and integration with other vendors is what needs to be improved in Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine)."
"I would like the product to include support for OSVS version three."
"The solution requires more simplified customization. However, part of the problem is my clients determining their own preferences. Technology can help and do many things, but you have to define your own policies to ensure that the solution or service works within those parameters. Helping customers understand their business and different processes is another issue not relating to the functionality of this solution."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by limiting the need to do customizations."
"I think the upgrade process is sometimes a little complicated and there are failures that occur."
"The product's support services in the French language are not free."
"We're worried about the scaling. We're told it will be okay and there won't be issues, however, I'm not 100% convinced."
"It should have a better user interface. Its flexibility should also be improved. It is not about simplifying; it is more about flexibility. Each company has its own requirements, and ForgeRock can provide more flexibility in terms of the use of existing modules to implement features for the customers."
"It should be a little bit easier to implement. It is user-friendly, but there is always scope for improvement."
"As with any complex software platform, there is a learning curve to using ForgeRock, and it may require specialized expertise to implement and manage effectively."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while ForgeRock is ranked 4th in Access Management with 27 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while ForgeRock 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 ForgeRock writes "Governance and access management solution used for multi-factor authentication that is outdated with an unresponsive UI". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas ForgeRock is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, PingID, Microsoft Entra ID, Auth0 and Symantec Siteminder.
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.