Share your experience using SecureTrust Network Access Control

My use case for Aruba ClearPass is that it's the best NAC solution.

The most valuable functions of Aruba ClearPass include self-service registration with an onboarding license and OnGuard for security to check system status. The solution allows onboarding for users and offers many additional capabilities.

Guest access management is particularly important for Aruba ClearPass. Users can implement self-registration for guest management. The system allows you to identify each device that has access, though this depends on multiple factors. The feature's implementation varies based on these different factors.

I cannot see any improvement in Aruba ClearPass as it has remained largely the same since its creation. It is based on Linux, and I think they must make it a fabric for all products, not only for Aruba ClearPass. It should be one integrated solution from the switching part, Aruba ClearPass part, and access point or wireless solution.

I am uncertain if they have integrated it with Central, but managing Aruba ClearPass through Central would be beneficial. I believe this is in HP's plan.

I have been working with Aruba ClearPass for approximately seven years.

The policy management capabilities of Aruba ClearPass can be complicated for normal users, but for experienced users, it is quite straightforward.

Regarding stability, Aruba ClearPass is the number one NAC solution I can rate. It is better than ICE and better than Forescout in my opinion.

From my perspective as a presales professional, when designing Aruba ClearPass from the beginning, you must make space for scalability. The process is straightforward as you only need to add a license. Everything will be handled when you add new users because all configurations are deployed from the beginning.

The customer service team is very good. When I encountered a problem with Aruba ClearPass, they sent an Indian support representative who was exceptionally experienced. I learned many things from him, as he was extraordinarily knowledgeable compared to other Aruba representatives I have worked with.

Positive

ICE (Identity Services Engine) from Cisco is the main competitor in the market for Aruba ClearPass. While I haven't personally worked with ICE, based on NSS Labs reports and discussions with colleagues, Aruba ClearPass is preferred over ICE.

Regarding on-premises deployment, there are two types: hardware server and VM. The hardware deployment is not simple and requires someone with significant experience. The person deploying should be at minimum a professional level, not someone junior, as the product involves many complex aspects.

We are a partner for Aruba.

Aruba ClearPass is very powerful when integrated with Palo Alto, resulting in enhanced security. The integration between Palo Alto and Aruba ClearPass is straightforward.

Their market share has grown significantly. While they initially had minimal market presence, they have increased their share across all Aruba products, not just one product.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Aruba ClearPass a 10.

I am using F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) along with Bot Management, API Gateway, API Security, and F5 Cloud.

I am using F5 Advanced WAF, but I switch between ZTNA solutions such as FortiSASE, Prisma Cloud, Palo Alto, and Cloudflare ZTNA.

My customers are using AWS, Cloudflare, and Azure.

This solution serves as a SASE component.

I am using Advanced Web Application Firewall (WAF).

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) provides excellent WAF and bot defense solutions.

We are using on-premises or cloud solutions with the Big-IP platform.

The most valuable features in F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) are the policy manager and public web access controllers.

My customers are using the Single Sign-On feature with SAML, RADIUS, and multi-factor authentication.

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is not running Anycast; it operates on-premises or multicast, though Anycast capability is required.

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is not user-friendly and operates slowly.

Additional features for architecture such as Anycast would be beneficial.

The ability to run the Anycast feature would be valuable, as the current solution only operates on-premises.

The interface is slow, and the speed needs improvement.

I have been working with F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) for over 10 years.

The solution is stable overall.

I replaced F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) with other vendors.

The replacement was necessary because other vendors provide SASE solutions, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is limited to APM functionality.

For cases where F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) doesn't fit the budget, I would recommend a new interface that is very user-friendly and faster, along with functionality such as public host, private host authentication, IPsec, and access control broker.

I am familiar with F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and its capabilities.

I consider Cloudflare when evaluating centralized access control features; Cloudflare utilizes multi-factor authentication and full API support, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) needs to enhance its API support.

I recommend F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) for large companies such as Tüpraş and Ford. Tüpraş is one of the biggest companies in Turkey, along with other customers such as Tofaş, Euroko, Koç Holding, and more.

For on-premises deployment, I would rate it a 10. For cloud deployment, I would rate it a seven.

I primarily use it on-premises.

I rate F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) eight out of ten.