Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs Cisco Secure Firewall comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
8.4
Cisco Identity Services Engine enhances security, reduces breaches, ensures compliance, simplifies management, and consolidates systems for cost savings and efficiency.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall offers improved security and efficiency, but cost and ROI vary based on deployment and usage.
Direct comparisons with Forescout reveal up to 30% to 40% difference in cost savings.
The biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is that there's no waste in any infrastructure cost and licensing costs for us.
From my point of view, the biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is the single pane of glass, which is a huge plus for us.
The biggest return on investment for me when using Cisco Secure Firewall is reliability and robust network design.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.9
Cisco ISE support is praised for knowledge and responsiveness, yet occasionally inconsistent with integration and follow-up challenges.
Sentiment score
7.5
Cisco Secure Firewall support is highly rated for knowledgeable assistance, though response times and access vary based on contracts.
I rate the technical support as one out of ten.
Sometimes it's challenging to identify which support team is responsible for certain issues, which is a significant concern.
I have to provide many logs, yet problems remain unresolved, often requiring workarounds rather than solutions.
I have been working with them on firewalls, wireless, switching, and routing, and the support is the best.
They have expertise and provide solutions for the most difficult problems.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) offers high scalability, supporting large deployments and enterprise expansions despite hardware and setup challenges.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall offers scalability and integration, though licensing complexity and scalability challenges in growth may concern some users.
Factors like architecture, business nature, and legal limitations such as GDPR affect it.
Scalability presents a challenge.
Compared to FortiGate and Palo Alto, it lags in configuration and other aspects.
Even with the highest one, the 4600, we still face issues, particularly when transitioning between screens; it becomes very slow.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Cisco ISE is highly reliable and stable, though larger deployments may experience occasional performance and configuration challenges.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall is highly reliable with minimal outages, though occasional upgrade issues are typically fixed with updates.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is considered very reliable and stable.
The stability of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is poor for certain use cases, like authentication.
We have often encountered split-brain scenarios during failover processes and code upgrades, which have been persistent problems for us.
We work with a cluster with high availability, so if something goes wrong, we have it functioning.
Cisco Secure Firewall offers exceptional performance and stability.
 

Room For Improvement

Cisco Identity Services Engine requires improved integration, user interface, documentation, compatibility, and management efficiency to enhance user experience.
Cisco Secure Firewall faces criticism for its complex GUI, high costs, and demands better features, integration, and performance improvements.
The whole setup works well with Cisco access points and Cisco switches, but when you have multiple vendors in the environment, such as HP switches or access points like Aruba, you'll find they will not work well with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE).
Pricing can be more expensive compared to other vendors, and there is a significant price gap observed, which doesn't seem justified by some specific features.
They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases.
My ongoing complaint for the last six years has been the lack of CLI functionality, which hinders my ability to work on the firewall, alongside concerns regarding deployment time.
Firepower Management Center is quite out of date compared to other vendors.
The integration between Cisco products themselves presents difficulties, such as SD-WAN configuration.
 

Setup Cost

Cisco ISE offers three pricing tiers, with high costs and complex licensing, but provides extensive features and potential discounts.
Cisco Secure Firewall is costly but offers robust support and reliability; licensing complexity can be mitigated by smart licensing.
Compared to other solutions like HPE ClearPass, Cisco is more costly, and the conversation suggests a possible forty percent price gap compared to competitors.
The license costs can range between $50,000 to $100,000 per year for enterprises.
Cloud solutions are expensive, while on-prem setups with shared environments are cheaper but not effective.
It's good to have them, however, it costs us a lot.
It's considered a premium, but people pay that price for Cisco.
There are a lot of in-place contracts for us that provide the benefit of discounts.
 

Valuable Features

Cisco ISE enhances network security with integration, 802.1X authentication, policy management, ease of use, and strong access control.
Cisco Secure Firewall provides robust security, scalability, and central management, with intuitive tools for efficient threat protection and network monitoring.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) offers authentication using RADIUS, enhancing network security by separating and segregating networks.
The solution is integrated with other Cisco devices and can offer automation for an organization, making deployments more dynamic and providing real-time visibility.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is very good at device administration.
What stands out positively about Cisco is their training and support, which has effectively prepared engineers to work with their products.
This is very important to my organization, as we work extensively with security because we are a bank, so we can keep the data safe.
Cisco Secure Firewall allows me to safeguard Layer 7 or Layer 3 and manage the security rules with the business needs of my organization.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Identity Services Eng...
Ranking in Cisco Security Portfolio
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
142
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (1st)
Cisco Secure Firewall
Ranking in Cisco Security Portfolio
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
428
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Cisco Security Portfolio category, the mindshare of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is 23.7%, up from 19.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall is 6.5%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cisco Security Portfolio
 

Featured Reviews

SunilkumarNaganuri - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced device administration hindered by complex deployment and security limitations
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication. They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases. This will give them a roadmap for software-defined access (SDA) use cases and network segmentation. Threat detection capabilities are very weak. Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.
Carlos Reis - PeerSpot reviewer
Proven reliability and strong support spark trust but system updates slow and complex
The Cisco Secure Firewall product in general has room for improvement. I had a problem this weekend working with one of them, and I think it's very specific, though I'm going to be more general with my answer. Cisco has the FMC as a centralized tool, but sometimes they have too many dependencies. I faced a problem this weekend because while trying to solve an issue with one of the company's firewall management centers, I couldn't update or install an update on the platform due to a remote site being down. The device got stuck in my queue. I had to cancel my maintenance because of that. Everyone was expecting me to fix many bugs, but because of one device, I had to cancel everything. Sometimes the ID is nice around Cisco, but another area they need to improve is the capability to manage multiple devices. The FMC manages many devices, but if I put too many, around 300 devices, it becomes very slow, and the system becomes heavy. When you compare that with solutions such as Palo Alto, Palo Alto can manage many more devices on the same type of platform. Cisco is better at managing things such as RMAs. They do that exceptionally, even with the support. However, when we're talking about the FMC itself, sometimes they have some small issues; the platform is very slow and has too many bugs in the versions. We constantly need to update the platform to maintain stability.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cisco Security Portfolio solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
41%
Computer Software Company
14%
University
5%
Manufacturing Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Aruba Clearpass or Cisco ISE?
Aruba ClearPass is a Network Access Control tool that gives secure network access to multiple device types. You can adapt the policies to VPN access, wired, or wireless access. You can securely ...
What are the main differences between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform?
OK, so Cisco ISE uses 802.1X to secure switchports against unauthorized access. The drawback of this is that ISE cannot secure the port if a device does not support 802.1x. Cameras, badge readers, ...
How does Cisco ISE compare with Fortinet FortiNAC?
Cisco ISE uses AI endpoint analytics to identify new devices based on their behavior. It will also notify you if someone plugs in with a device that is not allowed and will block it. The user exper...
Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?
When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage at large. In my opinion, Fortinet would be the best option and l use Fortinet too...
Which is better - Fortinet FortiGate or Cisco ASA Firewall?
One of our favorite things about Fortinet Fortigate is that you can deploy on the cloud or on premises. Fortinet Fortigate is very stable, reliable, and consistent. We like that we can manage the e...
How does Cisco's ASA firewall compare with the Firepower NGFW?
It is easy to integrate Cisco ASA with other Cisco products and also other NAC solutions. When you understand the Cisco ecosystem, it is very simple to handle. This solution has traffic inspection ...
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Adaptive Security Appliance, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, BC Hydro, Beachbody, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Cisco IT, Derby City Council, Global Banking Customer, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, Houston Methodist, Linz AG, London Hydro, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Molina Healthcare, MST Systems, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Reykjavik University, Wildau University
There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs. Cisco Secure Firewall and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.