We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and UserLock based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."It is stable and easy to use."
"We were originally a Cisco shop and Cisco ISE integrated well with our other Cisco switches and networks."
"We found all the features of the product to be valuable."
"At the moment, ISE seems to integrate very well with a number of other technologies."
"It's flexible and stable. It's been good as a standard environment to run."
"They have recently made a lot of improvements. My clients don't have much to complain about."
"SGTs are valuable because they make it easy to enforce policies, instead of pushing them across all the other platforms."
"There are a lot of integrations available with multiple vendors. This has made the solution easier to work with."
"We mainly implemented UserLock for multi-factor authentication, but the user login insights are also nice."
"The most valuable features are two-factor authentication and real-time logon monitoring."
"On the network services devices, when you click on filter, the filter comes up. However, when I type in a search and I want to click on something it defaults back to the main page. I keep having an issue with that, and I'm not doing anything wrong."
"The customer server was great but it would have been better for me if they had support in other languages such as Spanish."
"The UI and UX could be more seamless and easier to use."
"Compatibility and integration with other vendors is what needs to be improved in Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine)."
"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."
"This product doesn't work in isolation."
"Cisco ISE has numerous features that are impractical, and I won't utilize them since they require payment."
"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 product and service are already great as it is but if I could add one feature, I guess it would be nice to have another factor of authentication (two additional factors) like your phone and a token for example, for when people forget their phone at home."
"I would like to see UserLock add the ability to automatically create a group policy in Active Directory. That might streamline the setup process."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while UserLock is ranked 11th in Authentication Systems. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while UserLock is rated 10.0. 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 UserLock writes "Affordable, easy to use, and integrates well with Active Directory". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas UserLock is most compared with Cisco Duo, Microsoft Entra ID, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Silverfort and Aruba ClearPass.
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.