Aruba ClearPass Reviews

Three passes work better than other NAC products on identifying the VoIP devices and IoT devices with built-in features. On Guard and agent-based On Guard features are included under the use case.

The ClearPass solution includes role and role-based user and machine access, and they handle network segmentation using wired and wireless access methods.

We cannot onboard IoT devices such as printers, cameras, and some smaller devices. Although we can onboard larger devices such as Android, iOS, Apple, Mac, Windows, and Linux, this limitation is noted. It is also better to improve threat intelligence for built-in threat detection and prevention.

I have been working with ClearPass for no more than two years.

I have not noticed any stability or performance issues with ClearPass. It is better than other NAC solutions.

In our environment, ClearPass handles up to 100,000 users, which is better than some other NAC solutions like Fortinox that scale up to 25,000.

We have escalated questions to tech support, and I would rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

We deployed the solution under a VM-based ClearPass appliance in a cluster mode, adding devices such as wireless and switches.

I was involved in the deployment process. We followed a strategy where we deployed in cluster mode, adding devices such as wireless switches.

I don't compare pricing with other products. That said, it is moderate.

I recommend ClearPass for other users because it is a stable and consistent solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

It provides network access management.

It supports AAA and offers a range of features, including guest authentication for visitors and 802.1X authentication for employees. ClearPass provides options for customized authentication methods, such as SMS and social media authentication, which customers are effectively utilizing.

I found the internal authentication policy and user authentication problematic. I was facing issues with user authentication, but we eventually resolved these problems.

I have been using Aruba ClearPass as a partner for three years.

All customers are satisfied with the performance overall. I encountered a technical issue with a couple of customers. After integrating CPKN with LDAP, users need to reconnect via cable to update their password, as many companies have policies requiring password changes every 40 or 60 days. After updating the password, users can then reconnect via Wi-Fi. We resolved this issue for some customers, but one still faces difficulties.

400 users are using this solution.

Support was slightly delayed. In one case, resolving all the issues took almost two months. However, in the end, everything worked out. Technical support could benefit from more detailed training to better assist end users.

Positive

I have used Cisco ISE with other solutions but found some limitations in integrating it with other systems. For instance, one of my customers has successfully integrated their old Cisco devices with ClearPass. Integration-wise, ClearPass is much easier and less complex than other vendors.

When I first worked on it, I encountered some challenges, but I successfully upgraded and installed the software on the server. It’s normal to face issues the first time you handle something, but with continued work, you learn and improve.

If the customer's site is not ready or the infrastructure is incomplete, such as lacking switches or servers, it can significantly delay the process. For one customer, it took about fifteen days to get everything in order, while for another, it took over a month and a half. However, once the site and infrastructure are prepared, setting up ClearPass typically takes only three to four days.

If you follow the user guide guidelines, integration is very easy.

We have both a cloud-based client and an on-premises client, and both are used for employees and visitors. Implementing these two approaches, cloud-based and on-premises controller-based works well. I have experience with both methods.

I recommend using ClearPass because the customer needed user authentication through LDAP. Although the DataSheet indicates that IAP can integrate with LDAP, having ClearPass simplifies the entire process, including authentication, accounting, and authorization. Whenever I visit customers, and they request solutions, I always advise them to consider ClearPass. Aruba products are generally more cost-effective than other vendors, offering the same performance, facilities, and features.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

From a pricing perspective, even though the initial procurement was costly, the renewals were not that costly. From an OpEx perspective, considering that the renewals were not that costly, the cost is very much under control. I am not talking about the initial CapEx, but from an OpEx perspective, the tool's cost is very much under control, which is the most important feature. If I don't consider the fine-tuning part and take into consideration the implementation method, I would describe it as something that has a straightforward process. The fine-tuning part takes time.

The support offered for the solution has certain concerns, making it an area where improvements are required. Regarding the solution, the integration issues are hardly a problem. It is important to have a good support partner who knows about the solution so that the product's users don't face any integration-related issues. My company's main problem was related to the tool's support.

I have been using Aruba ClearPass for a year and a half. My company is a customer of the product.

The stability of the solution was okay.

My company has around 1,200 to 1,300 users of the product.

I have experience with Fortinet. In terms of the functionalities that my company is able to achieve, Fortinet was much better than Aruba ClearPass. Fortinet also used to provide good support. Though the features provided by Fortinet and Aruba ClearPass were the same, the ease of use and the support provided by the former were important.

It is easy to look at the deployment phase in two parts. If you are looking at the base installation, then it was a very straightforward process, which I would rate an eight or nine out of ten. If you look at the tool's deployment phase from a fine-tuning perspective, I feel it was very complex.

The solution can be deployed in three months. Three to four people in my company were involved in the deployment process.

In terms of your fixed cost, it is much less than a lot of other solutions in the market. The initial cost is very high.

The main reason my company started to look for alternate solutions against Aruba ClearPass was that we faced some issues in terms of the levels of integration that we were able to achieve and the support offered by Aruba.

Speaking about my experience with integrating Aruba ClearPass with some multi-vendor environments, I would say that my company had faced issues in terms of the support that we received for Aruba ClearPass, specifically when it came to the area of the configuration changes or any part involving reimplementation. My company did some reference checks related to Aruba's partners, and we saw that we were not getting very positive feedback regarding how the solution is implemented in some organizations.

I haven't reached the level where I can comment about how the product's guest access functionality has improved visitor management for our business. When my company was involved in the reimplementation phase of the tool, we wanted to implement guest access, Wi-Fi access, and other advanced functionalities but didn't reach that level.

In terms of real-time functionalities, my company was not able to access such features, considering the support-related issues we were facing. My company was not able to make good use of it.

If you plan to use the solution, it is important to ensure that you have very good support in terms of both the OEM product and the partner.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

I use the solution for automatic authentication. We purchased access license 1K and use it with our WiFi networks and user LANs. Our company domain uses authentication through Active Directory. We also have a central MSP account from where we are managing 53,000 devices.

I like the stability and the GUI, which is always improving.

Because some users use OS 10, it would be good if the solution could group its functions better. Also, the processing time taken while onboarding needs to be reduced.

I've been using Aruba ClearPass for two to three years.

The solution is stable.

We have 300 to 400 people using Aruba ClearPass at our office.

The solution was easy to set up. There was a feature that needed 15 to 30 minutes to load. This is a concern when there are hundreds of projects because it wastes time. The onboarding time still needs to be considered.

When deploying the solution, we do the pre-configuration at our office, so every device should be configured. Afterward, we send the devices to many customers' locations. That's why we need onboarding time to be reduced because we are not dealing directly with the deployment. We are using panels.

We had three to four staff members handling the configuration and the deployment.

The solution is priced per user. There are three types of licenses.

The last version of the Aruba Central portal only opened connections to Amazon and Azure, making integrating with those platforms easier. Authentication was simple, so the portal and the cloud were well-integrated.

I recommend Aruba ClearPass to anyone planning on using it and rate it a seven to eight out of ten.

We use Aruba ClearPass for network access control, managing authentication, authorization, and policy enforcement. It ensures secure and compliant access across diverse organizational environments and supports integration with existing network infrastructures.

The platform offers comprehensive policy enforcement, supports multiple authentication methods, and integrates seamlessly with various network security solutions.

The product's technical support services need improvement. 

The product is stable.

Currently, ClearPass supports approximately 3,000 students and 500 researchers, staff, and administrators, totaling around 3,500 users in our current deployment. It is scalable, accommodating flexible licensing options.

Aruba's support for ClearPass is generally good, though improvements in responsiveness, especially for international users, could enhance overall customer satisfaction.

The product's policy management capabilities enable precise control over user access and device compliance, significantly bolstering network security by enforcing tailored policies across the organization.

I rate it a nine out of ten. 

We have a wireless network for guests and employees. That is one of the biggest use cases for ClearPass.

These products help you to organize stuff. At the same time, these allow forms of regulatory requirements, for example, how to do, or what to do, what not to do, et cetera.

There are many features. Use case-wise, there are maybe 60% of features that you will choose. We don't have any particular kind of feature usage. Our usage is typical usage for any enterprise.

It is easy to use and more integrated with the Aruba wireless networks. That was the biggest selling point for us. We use Aruba Wireless and the Aruba identity engine as well as ClearPass. That was the whole point of using this product. Technically you can use it anywhere, however, since we already use a lot of Aruba, it made sense to keep using another solution.

The setup is simple. 

After HP, their support is the worst.

When you come into the production part, you want to know how easily you can do the updates or how you can easily you can do the patching. Once it comes to the support, if it is in the middle of the day when you are having some issues, and you don't get it, that's where you start thinking this is not the right product. For me, I mean, overall, it's not the pre-sales experience that needs improvement. It's post-sales. I know Aruba is one of the two products that I always like; however, it's the whole life cycle of the product that makes something good. For example, Cisco is not a good product. No one can beat their support. Aruba is a good product, yet if you need technical assistance, it's not good at all. 

I've been using the solution for six to eight years.

The stability is fine. We have no problems with that. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. Peformance-wise, it's good.

The solution is scalable. I'd rate the ability to scale at an eight or nine out of ten in terms of how easy it is to expand. 

We have 5,000 users on the solution. 

Support is not great. It's actually quite bad. 

Negative

We use Aruba ClearPass and we use Cisco.

Aruba is a little simpler. When I say simpler, it means it has fewer knobs to tweak. However, if you have more knobs to tweak, you can control it a little bit differently.

Cisco ISE has been patched up in the last couple of years. It is a very good product and a very stable one. I don't see any real difference between the two products. They are 75% the same. We have the Cisco switching, and we like the Cisco ISE for that. If you have Aruba on the wireless, you want more Aruba.

It's fairly easy to set up. The vendor we work with is good and we are quite familiar with how it works. We use other similar products and don't have issues with the setup. Similar to Aruba and then Aruba Wireless, it is easy to manage with one vendor or one full contractor and you leave it there.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten in terms of ease of setup. 

We spent maybe three or four hours across two days doing the deployment. 

In terms of maintenance, you need to handle patching and vulnerability management sometimes. Historically, maintenance has been fine with the older versions. Recently, it is a little bit challenging.

We have three people who can the maintenance. Typically, one person is needed for the job.

We had a partner who sold Aruba to us. However, we work for other products, so we just sat down for a couple of days and that's it. That is all the time you need to set it up.

Their ROI is good. The ROI may be a bit less than Cisco in terms of the full environment. 

The licensing is almost the same as Cisco ISE. It is a little less, actually. It is a fair price. The only thing is all these products know each other's prices so they keep theirs pretty close to the same. Aruba will typically be a little less than Cisco to make it seem that they show benefit on the cost. However, it depends on how your terms are with the partners. You can maybe get a better discount. It is how your relationship is the principal that dictates the price. We have a fair discount, for example.

Support may be an additional cost.

We're a customer and end-user.

While I'm unsure which version of the solution we're using, it's likely close to the latest.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I would advise new users to try to get better support lined up with them before buying the product. There's your account manager and support. If you discuss support before purchasing, you won't be alone. In contrast, with Cisco, you are never alone. Even if you call in the middle of the night, you will get assistance. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the solution for security.

It provides a single access point and is highly available.

The period of firmware updates is very short.

I have been using Aruba ClearPass for one year.

It consists of one-time passwords, so you don't have many challenges.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

We have 700-800 users, out of which 50 are concurrent.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The initial setup is easy.
If you take a controller concerning the APN, that is a one-time setup. Once you set it up, it doesn't give you any problem going further. The one-time setup takes around four to eight hours.

Compared to other solutions, it has a standard price.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My prior company used the solution to integrate multiple environments such as Cisco, Aruba wireless or wired devices, and BYOD cases. 

The solution integrates seamlessly. 

The continuous server and posturing are valuable. 

The solution should be more precise for VMs and allow for management of the entire system or stack. For example, the solution shows device-only information for Cisco AIs.

I have been using the solution for seven years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is definitely scalable. 

Technical support assisted us with our implementation and was good. 

The setup was straightforward with no issues. Deployment took one month and was a challenge because we had to integrate 600 devices. 

We utilized technical support for our implementation. 

The ROI is secure data. The question is whether you can afford downtime for a single unit or an entire system. It is hard to measure the value of data but is something you can't compromise. 

The solution has a licensing model. 

We did a proof of concept with Cisco ISE but chose the solution because we liked its seamless integration experience. 

Before implementing the solution, it is important to understand the system, develop plans, and determine what needs to be integrated. Learn what the solution does and how it will work with your use case. 

For example, some people choose the work kit without knowing what they need. Some require only the resource manager. Some don't know their gradual requirements for monitoring or management. Some don't understand that the solution is also provides network security. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.