Compare Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager

Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control with 15 reviews while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is ranked 6th in Privileged Access Management with 4 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "All devices have multifactor authentication in collaboration with IT which secures access to all our devices". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Privileged Access Manager writes "One stop access for all things involving privileged access management". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform and CyberArk PAS, whereas Symantec Privileged Access Manager is most compared with CyberArk PAS, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and ARCON Privileged Access Management.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, ForeScout, Aruba Networks and others in Network Access Control. Updated: March 2020.
406,860 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
Using this solution gives us the ability to allow proper access to the network.The biggest value of ISE is that it can get so granular with gaming systems, versus IoT and BYOD.Easy to use and provides good supportThe best feature of the Cisco ISE platform is that it is compatible with Microsoft products.We found that the most valuable features associated with this tool are posture assessment, policy management, VLAN assignments, guest assignment, and BYOD services. In addition to these services, the Cisco IOS software switch configuration feature is another very valuable aspect of the policy and compliance solution.In terms of scalability, you need to factor in your licenses. With a virtual platform, the scalability is more than sufficient. We have over one thousand users.Visitors can be granted access to the wifi network using their cellphones, notebooks or tablets in a very easy way. The ease of accessibility that anyone can have to the network is very quick and is a big improvement in our network.For guests we give them limited access to the internet when they come in so that access has been useful. Previously, we just used to give them the APN key which they would leave with. Now, we give them credentials to use that are for a limited period of time.

Read more »

It reduces the viral attacks on my website. It also allows certain users access to see what happens daily.We have received good support from the tech support team.CA PAM is working well for us.The DB clustering is a really good benefit of using CA PAM.We can enforce complicated password policies and very important frequent password changes.The product is very scalable in terms of concurrent sessions that it can handle at a time, number of device it can support, accounts that it can manage, or number of nodes that you can deploy in a cluster.

Read more »

Cons
There should be a single button that can be pressed to dismiss all of the alarms at once.I'd like to see an easier way to upgrade to larger versions, as well as more best practices that are easier to locate on their support page.An area that could be improved is the agent. The challenge now is that agent and most of the computers have changed. They could think about agent-less deployment.Cisco ISE is complex. The deployment and design of networks with it is so complex. If it could change it would be better.There are issues with respect to the posture assessment function. It's been observed that customers are not receiving total access to the network because the assessment agent is glitchy and malfunctions from time-to-time. I would like to see refining of the compliance assessment and adding more detailed compliance of endpoints on the user end.There can be a little bit more integration between the controller management and ISE. There are two dashboards, you have the controller dashboards, and you have the ISE dashboard it would is a way to maybe integrate that into one. That would be great. It's not that bad. It would be easier if it could be combined into one dashboard.There should be an easier way to do the upgrades. There are a lot of steps to get to the next version from the previous version which ends up being a bit of the headache with the upgrade.In order to make it a ten, it should be more user-friendly. You need somebody who is knowledgeable about it to use it. It's not easy to use. We have to rely heavily on technical support.

Read more »

The setup is complex.I would like this solution to be simpler. It should have a one-click access that works together with AWS.An improvement for this solution is that it should not be constantly based on user name and password. There should be a condition to edit and update your username.We experience stability issues after every patch upgrade. This is a place where CA needs to improve drastically.The service account management functionality needs to be extended to application pools, SQL database, PowerShell scripts, service account discovery, etc.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
If you go directly with Cisco for the implementation it's very, very expensive.

Read more »

It is reasonably priced.It is more expensive than other solutions on the market.I would prefer better licensing options for the 20-100 users we have at a given time.Pricing is fair compared to other top vendors.The licensing is simple and scalable.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control solutions are best for your needs.
406,860 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
Views
28,208
Comparisons
19,068
Reviews
12
Average Words per Review
384
Avg. Rating
8.3
Views
6,582
Comparisons
3,253
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
345
Avg. Rating
7.3
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco ISECA PAM, Xceedium Xsuite, CA Privileged Access Manager
Learn
Cisco
Broadcom
Overview
Identity Services Engine is a security policy management platform that automates and enforces context-aware security access to network resources. It delivers superior user and device visibility to support enterprise mobility experiences and to control access. It shares data with integrated partner solutions to accelerate their capabilities to identify, mitigate, and remediate threats.

CA Privileged Access Manager is a simple-to-deploy, automated, proven solution for privileged access management in physical, virtual and cloud environments. It enhances security by protecting sensitive administrative credentials such as root and administrator passwords, controlling privileged user access, proactively enforcing policies and monitoring and recording privileged user activity across all IT resources.  It includes CA PAM Server Control (previously CA Privileged Identity Manager) for fine-grained protection of critical servers

Offer
Learn more about Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine)
Learn more about Symantec Privileged Access Manager
Sample Customers
Aegean Motorway, BC Hydro, Beachbody, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Cisco IT, Derby City Council, Global Banking Customer, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, Houston Methodist, Linz AG, London Hydro, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Molina Healthcare, MST Systems, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Reykjavik University, Wildau UniversityNEOVERA, Telesis, eSoft
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider29%
Government18%
Software R&D Company12%
Financial Services Firm6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company25%
Comms Service Provider23%
Government9%
Manufacturing Company5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm24%
Retailer18%
Government12%
Comms Service Provider12%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company26%
Financial Services Firm19%
Comms Service Provider16%
Retailer10%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, ForeScout, Aruba Networks and others in Network Access Control. Updated: March 2020.
406,860 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Network Access Control 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.