We performed a comparison between Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"This is stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The most valuable feature in Centrify is the ability to authenticate in a Linux environment, because this is what my customers were looking for. They are coming from a Linux environment, so they appreciate the identity and access management for allowing Linux workloads to authenticate securely."
"Cisco ISE's profiling and posturing features ensure that all devices are compliant with regulatory authorities."
"We found all the features of the product to be valuable."
"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."
"Profiling is one of the most valuable features. We have a lot of different devices between cameras, access points, and laptops that get plugged in."
"The RADIUS Server holds the most value."
"Cisco ISE scales exceptionally well."
"They have recently made a lot of improvements. My clients don't have much to complain about."
"We were originally a Cisco shop and Cisco ISE integrated well with our other Cisco switches and networks."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"What can be improved in Centrify is the integration between the on-premise environment, specifically for Linux environments with the cloud infrastructure, such as Microsoft as it was during my time as a solution architect."
"One of the issues that we used to have was with profiling because we're working with a service provider that uses a lot of bring your own devices."
"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."
"They should improve the upgrades. It's not easy to upgrade the solution."
"Some of ISE's features need to be more agile. For example, we couldn't integrate our data because Cisco needs your data to be in its own format."
"I would like for the next release to be easier to implement and to limit its dependencies around ISE, Windows, the network as a whole, etc."
"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 support could be faster and the pricing could be reduced."
"There are always some things that I would request."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) while Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews. Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] is rated 7.0, while Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] writes "Has system multi-factor authentication abilities but is lacking connection between on-premise and cloud-based solutions". 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". Centrify Endpoint Services [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 Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.