We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Ivanti NAC based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The integration with Active Directory is the most valuable feature for us."
"When you push out the policy, it is able to populate the entire network at one time."
"The most valuable feature is 801.1x and another very good feature is the TACACS."
"The solution enables us to authenticate with AD."
"Being able to authenticate wired users through 802.1X is valuable as it enhances our security."
"Visitors can be granted access to the wifi network using their cellphones, notebooks or tablets in a very easy way. The ease of accessibility that anyone can have to the network is very quick and is a big improvement in our network."
"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 profiling model included is the most valuable feature."
"Ivanti NAC's most valuable feature is reasonable pricing."
"The profiler option allows me to see every detail in a systematic manner from a switch. I can choose the switch and I can see the port NAC address and time."
"Integration with other vendors is possible."
"Support and integration for the active devices needs to be worked on. Their features mainly work well with Mac devices. If we use an HP the Mac functionalities may no longer be able to deliver."
"The learning curve is steep and the initial setup is complex."
"There are still some bugs in ISE that need to be worked out."
"Cisco could improve the GUIs on their hardware."
"They should improve their licensing. Licensing is always trouble with Cisco, and Cisco Identity Services Engine is no different. The way the product is licensed could be improved."
"The support could be faster and the pricing could be reduced."
"The compliance and posture don't always work. They should make it more stable. With each upgrade, we lose some functionality. We have to wait for another upgrade."
"The ISE software needs to be improved so that it is easier to administer."
"At some point, the server got cached and we faced several issues that impacted our customers. We would like to have this resolved."
"The documentation needs to be improved. There are a lot of details that are missed which makes it confusing."
"The product's performance needs improvement."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while Ivanti NAC is ranked 14th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 3 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Ivanti NAC is rated 7.6. 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 Ivanti NAC writes "Affordable product with an easy initial setup process". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Ivanti NAC is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform and Fortinet FortiNAC. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Ivanti NAC report.
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.