We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Impulse Point SafeConnect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."The interface is pretty easy to use."
"In terms of scalability, you need to factor in your licenses. With a virtual platform, the scalability is more than sufficient. We have over one thousand users."
"The RADIUS Server holds the most value."
"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."
"The ability to allow or deny hosts onto the network is valuable. It provides great security to the network environment."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with StealthWatch and DNA as one fabric."
"After the product was installed, no one could access the secure connection network. In order for any laptop or any endpoint device to attach to my network, it needs to be authorized or be certified to be connected."
"The biggest value of ISE is that it can get so granular with gaming systems, versus IoT and BYOD."
"It is very easy to scale the product."
"The user interface could be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"It would be ideal if Cisco could provide some short training videos or documentation to customers to help them understand how to use the product."
"The software is a little bit complicated to understand in the beginning, meaning the implementation. It needs proper documentation so that we can understand the options more easily."
"Troubleshooting and multi-ISE can be challenging with the solution."
"A lot of people tell you the hardware requirements for ISE are pretty substantial. If you're running a virtual environment, you're going to be dedicating quite a bit of resources to an ISE VM. That is something that could be worked on."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"I'd like to see the logging be a bit more robust in terms of what it has baked in. If I want to do any in-depth searching, I have to export all the logs to an external platform like Elastic or LogRhythm and then parse through them myself. It would be nice if I could find what I want, when I want it, on the platform itself."
"The solution can lag somewhat as we have a large database."
"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while Impulse Point SafeConnect is ranked 17th in Network Access Control (NAC). Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Impulse Point SafeConnect is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Impulse Point SafeConnect writes "Easy to scale, enforces policies well, and has responsive technical support". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Impulse Point SafeConnect is most compared with Forescout Platform.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.