We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Leiberman RED Identity Management [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Forescout and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."The interconnection with the ecosystem and the ability to force rules all over the network are the most important features."
"Stable network administration solution that can be installed easily, and comes with fast technical support."
"The TACACS and RADIUS have been the most valuable features so far."
"There is good integration with third-party systems like antivirus patch management, MDM."
"It integrates with the rest of our platform, like our firewall, and helps us a lot. It also does a good job establishing trust for every access request."
"A lot of customers use a third party to manage their guest Wi-Fi. Cisco ISE presents the ability to bring that in-house so that customers can have full control over it, change the branding, and get extra telemetry from it and the user data. It works really well for our customers."
"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."
"Cisco ISE integrates with everything else."
"It's more of a risk reduction. It takes passwords that are not being managed properly and manages them automatically which really reduces risk."
"The one main thing that it can improve on is the GUI. As the newest addition to the team, I struggle a little bit to get around it just because it has so many features."
"Adding new devices was a little cumbersome. I haven't done it that many times, but I remember that adding new devices to the authentication piece of it was a little cumbersome. The way I was shown to do it, I thought it was odd because we had to go into the active device, copy the file down, export it, make some changes to it, and then reimport it as opposed to being able to click it and having a template to fill out."
"The user interface can be improved."
"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."
"Automation [is an area for improvement]. It seems like everywhere I look, automation is super important. Automation and integrations. That's the area it could be improved..."
"An area that could be improved is the agent. The challenge now is that agent and most of the computers have changed. They could think about agent-less deployment."
"They should improve the upgrades. It's not easy to upgrade the solution."
"There is room for improvement in CLI. Most things are done through the GUI, and there aren't many commands or troubleshooting options available compared to other Cisco products like switches and routers."
"They should improve the application password management. The capability to manage high availability application passwords is its biggest shortcoming."
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 Leiberman RED Identity Management [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Network Access Control (NAC). Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Leiberman RED Identity Management [EOL] is rated 7.8. 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 Leiberman RED Identity Management [EOL] writes "It’s greatest ability is that it can easily randomize all local accounts on almost any endpoint". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Leiberman RED Identity Management [EOL] is most compared with .
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.