We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Sophos Network Access Control 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."Improves switch account management."
"RADIUS is the best feature because it supplies authentication to our entire campus."
"The most valuable features are the NAC and the bundles that are available with Cisco ISE, such as Cisco ACS being integrated."
"It is stable and easy to use."
"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."
"The solution cuts down on the repercussions of getting malware or ransomware."
"The core point is that Cisco ISE is the same globally compared to FortiAuthenticator. Whether I deploy in China, the US, South Africa, or wherever, I'm can get all the capabilities. It allows me to directly integrate with 365, and from a communications point of view, that is a good capability."
"There is good integration with third-party systems like antivirus patch management, MDM."
"Web protection, URL filtering, and application filtering are the most valuable features of Sophos Network Access Control."
"Sophos Network Access Control has a useful interface, and I like its dashboard, which is very useful for us to check everything."
"The installation is very straightforward."
"There is really good visibility for the appliance."
"The most valuable features of Sophos Network Access Control are the quick response times to threats and reliable security."
"What Sophos has done is integrate almost the entire OSI layer infrastructure. It gives me visibility across my infrastructure. It gives me visibility into all the mobile devices that are on my network and into the security I have on those mobile devices."
"The wifi control is fantastic and makes it very easy to administer."
"The scalability of the system and the performance of the system and the solution's most valuable features."
"Cisco ISE can become quite complex, especially with policy sets, the entire authentication process, and everything involved."
"Documentation is probably the worst part of the software."
"The area where things could be improved is education. It's complicated to deploy initially because you have to know what you're getting into."
"In an upcoming release, it would be nice to have NAC already standard in the solution."
"Third-party integration is important, as well as the continuous adaptation feature which is the AIOps. It would be helpful to include the AIOps."
"It should be virtualized because many people have begun migrating to the cloud. They should offer a hybrid version."
"Adding new devices was a little cumbersome. I haven't done it that many times, but I remember that adding new devices to the authentication piece of it was a little cumbersome. The way I was shown to do it, I thought it was odd because we had to go into the active device, copy the file down, export it, make some changes to it, and then reimport it as opposed to being able to click it and having a template to fill out."
"The pricing and licensing structure are not ideal for customers."
"What needs to be improved on is the fact that Sophos consumes a lot of processor resources and, once it starts scanning, the RAM utilization is very high."
"The solution can improve the for applying policies. They can be complex depending don't the group they are applied to."
"The solution could increase the integration with other platforms or other systems. This would be very useful."
"Sophos Network Access Control requires a lot of resources to work, which is an area for improvement. Pricing could also be improved because it's costly."
"The solution could offer more useful documentation."
"I would like more details on the incoming connection, like what is the download speed and how it fluctuates. If Sophos can give that information, it would be really good."
"The user interface, in terms of managing the product, could be better."
"It would be good if Sophos Network Access Control had better integration with other devices."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sophos Network Access Control Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while Sophos Network Access Control is ranked 7th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 18 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Sophos Network Access Control is rated 8.6. 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 Sophos Network Access Control writes "An affordable solution that provides web protection, URL filtering, and application filtering". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Sophos Network Access Control is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and Ruckus Cloudpath. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Sophos Network Access Control 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.