We performed a comparison between CA Identity Suite [EOL] and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SailPoint, One Identity and others in Identity Management (IM)."The support for the validity of the resources is valuable. The tool allows resource assignments within a validity period so that the managers do not have to remember to revoke the access once the work is done."
"We don't have to go in and do a lot of the work that we did before. It may have saved us somewhere in the range of 10 to 30 percent of the time we spent on provisioning access."
"Omada's most valuable aspect is its usability."
"Omada Identity Suite has a very powerful workflow engine. It is used for requesting access for approval to everything that's around Access Management and for re-certification purposes."
"Omada offers a technical solution that addresses both our needs."
"The Governance and self-service that can be set up so you can use them yourself to work in the system are the most valuable features. End users can be enabled to help themselves."
"I'm not using Omada, but the interface is easy to use and gives you a solid overview of your identities."
"The most valuable feature of Omada is its API connectivity, which allows seamless integration with various services like SAP, GRC, and Microsoft licenses."
"You can spin up IDM or Identity Suite in a few hours and it is ready to use."
"With the Virtual Appliance, combined with CA Identity Manager and GovernanceMinder as one solution, it eliminates having multiple infrastructure requirements, multiple products, and gives a holistic view of the access granting."
"The most valuable feature is the re-certification campaign capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the speed of implementation. Now with the Virtual Appliance, it's much faster. In the past, to implement this kind of solution, it would take so many weeks. Now, it takes one day, or minutes, and we have the deployment ready."
"I found all of them quite valuable, especially the identity manager, governance, and identity portal. All the features are helpful."
"Nowadays it is offered as a Virtual Appliance, and that saves considerable time for installing and controlling it."
"I have found that all of the features are valuable. It is very easy to deploy because we are able to port users directly from Active Directory (AD) and LDAP."
"The access policies, and all of the policies in Cisco ISE, are important to us."
"For my use cases, the in-depth troubleshooting into why a client can't connect or why they failed, is very valuable. I can go back to someone and say, 'Hey, it's not my network. It's their certificates or user error,' or something else."
"Cisco offers automation, visibility, and control as well as third party integration capabilities."
"I really enjoy the live log section. Sometimes, you will have someone who is having issues connecting to the network, and then you have to ask them the dreaded question of, "Did you type a password wrong?" They will probably tell you, "No," but the live log can help sort that out. It gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy."
"It's easy to change and add policies."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco ISE is its seamless integration with the switches and the entire suite, enabling wireless access and smooth client information retrieval."
"For me, the TACACS feature is the most valuable. I have also used Cisco ISE with LDAP, not with Active Directory. That works for me because I prefer LDAP versus Active Directory."
"I would like to see them expand the functionality of the tool to continue to be competitive with the monsters out there. For example, they could add functionality on the authentication side, functionality that Octa and SailPoint have. But they should do that while maintaining the same simplicity that makes Omada a product of choice today."
"Its flexibility is both a good thing and a bad thing. Because it is very flexible, it also becomes too complex. This is common for most of the products we evaluated. Its scalability should be better. It had a few scalability issues."
"We are trying to use Omada's standards and to adapt our processes. But we have had some trouble with the bad documentation. This is something that they could improve on. It has not been possible for us to analyze some of the problems so far, based on the documentation. We always need consultants. The documentation should include some implementation hints and some guidelines for implementing the processes."
"The current reporting tools in Omada are limited, but we expect significant improvements in the new version."
"There is room for improvement in Omada's integration capabilities, particularly in streamlining complex integrations and enhancing programming logic for better rule management."
"The comprehensiveness of Omada's out-of-the-box connectors for the applications we use could be better. We are getting a new HR system called Cornerstone for which they do not have an out-of-the-box connector, so we have to take the REST connector and play around with it."
"If you find an error and you need it fixed, you have to upgrade. It's not like they say, "Okay, we'll fix this problem for you." You have to upgrade. The last time we upgraded, because there was an error in a previous version, we had to pay 150,000 Danish Krone (about $24,000 at the time of this review) to upgrade our systems... That means that we have to pay to get errors fixed that Omada has made in programming the system. I hope they change this way of looking at things."
"The account management integration isn't bad, but it isn't plug-and-play like Microsoft Azure. You need some deep development knowledge to set up the connectors."
"I would like synchronization when a mapping is added between end points. Currently, the synchronization is not complete. It would be great if this synchronization happened immediately."
"The connectors for the identity and governance part could use some improvement, by way of adding more areas. They need more development to cover more target applications."
"The documentation can be improved because sometimes we have some technical issues that were not documented and we have to rely on support to solve them. Then there are issues around getting the architecture, but it's challenging to get the architecture."
"If there was a seamless integration between portal and IdentityMinder, then that would help a bit."
"It would be helpful for us to know what needs to be deployed, configured, and what changes we need to make to our devices when we don't receive the specific login which is an indication of a lack of connection or incorrect configuration."
"Cisco ISE could be simplified somewhat. I would also prefer certificate-based authentication over confirmation-based authentication for all the processes. It's possible for us to do a workaround, but the process needs to be simplified."
"Sometimes, there are instances when Cisco ISE simply fails to function without any apparent reason, and regardless of the investigation we undertake, the logs indicate that everything is functioning properly, making it somewhat inexplicable."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for every access request. We have had a little bit of a challenge with profiling, but we are probably about 80% there."
"The primary issue is the slowness of the application and the web interface. We have multiple admin nodes and app nodes. So when I need to get some information about a particular user, the GUI would take ten to fifteen seconds in loading when we need to know right away."
"There is room for improvement in its ability to allow end users to self-enroll their devices. Instead, you should be able to assign that permission by AD group, which is currently not available."
"I would like to see integration with other vendors, and the RADIUS integration needs to be improved a little bit."
"Since we have started, we struggled a lot to implement this solution into our network, and we opened a case a couple of times. Up until this point, nothing else needs to be improved with this product."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CA Identity Suite [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Identity Management (IM) while Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews. CA Identity Suite [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CA Identity Suite [EOL] writes "Eliminates multiple infrastructure requirements and products, gives a holistic view of access granting". On the other hand, 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". CA Identity Suite [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator.
We monitor all Identity Management (IM) 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.