We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"There is good integration with third-party systems like antivirus patch management, MDM."
"The RADIUS Server holds the most value."
"We were originally a Cisco shop and Cisco ISE integrated well with our other Cisco switches and networks."
"One of the most important features is the authentication security for the individual connection to the network through their computer or laptop."
"The most valuable features are the NAC and the bundles that are available with Cisco ISE, such as Cisco ACS being integrated."
"The most valuable features are the ability to retrieve information about Active Directory user names, viewing the log files to see which MAC address tried to connect with the created SSIDs, portal designing for your company, hotspot tools, and creating network rules for WiFi access."
"The interconnection with the ecosystem and the ability to force rules all over the network are the most important features."
"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 solution is easy to use."
"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."
"The user interface can be improved."
"The solution lacks properly knowledgeable support, especially internationally, and this is why I am exploring other applications."
"I would like to see the product simplified more, especially with the configuration."
"The solution can lag somewhat as we have a large database."
"It is too complex. It should be easy to use. We are not such a big team. We only have three engineers to work with this, and we don't use all of the functionality of the product. Its range of functionality is too wide for us, and this is the reason why we are thinking of switching to a more simple product. We have shortlisted a Microsoft solution. We have a big footprint for Microsoft products, especially in security. As a global strategy, we try to leverage to the maximum what is possible around Microsoft."
"The solution is not so user-friendly."
"Deploying to a machine, as opposed to a dedicated appliance, can be a bit difficult."
"The installation is easy, it can take between five minutes to four hours depending on the complexity of the environment. The speed of the installation could improve for more complex environments."
"The price can be lower, especially for subscriptions. It should be a lot cheaper to have a wide range of customers. The price should be comparable to competitive products like Forescout or Fortinet FortiNAC. Forescout is cheaper for customers looking for a cloud solution."
"There are other cheaper options available."
"It would be beneficial to have a single license that included all of the features."
"I think licensing costs roughly $2,000 a year. ISE is more expensive than Network Access Control."
"I think the price is okay."
"The price is a bit on the high side."
"I believe I have paid around $1,000 in licensing fees. The license is annual."
"For the Avast virus scan, we pay around USD $95 per machine for five years which includes all updates and technical support."
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 28 reviews while ExtremeControl is ranked 10th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 1 review. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 7.6, while ExtremeControl is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Streamlines security policy management and reduces operating costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ExtremeControl writes "Stable, easy to use, and installation can be simple". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, Fortinet FortiNAC, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Tenable SC, whereas ExtremeControl is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Sophos Network Access Control, Forescout Platform and MetaAccess.
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.