"I like that Cisco ISE is easy to use."
"The most valuable features are authentication, we have more granular control on the access policies for the administrators. The solution is easy to use, has a center point administration, and has a good GUI."
"I have found that all of the features are valuable. It is very easy to deploy because we are able to port users directly from Active Directory (AD) and LDAP."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with StealthWatch and DNA as one fabric."
"From a configuration point of view, it's simple."
"SGTs are valuable because they make it easy to enforce policies, instead of pushing them across all the other platforms."
"The most valuable features are the ability to retrieve information about Active Directory user names, viewing the log files to see which MAC address tried to connect with the created SSIDs, portal designing for your company, hotspot tools, and creating network rules for WiFi access."
"Authentication is the most valuable feature because it puts our company at another level of security."
"Integration with other vendors is possible."
"Cisco ISE has almost all the features we are looking for now, but sometimes the configuration, such as the conditions, is a little difficult to understand and not so easy to navigate."
"It is a good product, but in order to use all of the functions of the product, you must have a good understanding of the product. You must know how to use and manage it. It is a little bit complicated to configure and manage. It must be simplified to make it easy to manage for end users. In the initial stage, we found ISE complicated for end users. It was not easy to manage it or to write authentication and authorization protocol. They must improve its management and make it easy for end users. The monitoring and reporting capabilities can be improved because end users want to quickly see what is happening in their network. There were some restrictions in working with other vendors. It should also have a better and easy integration with other vendors."
"The user interface can be improved."
"The interface could be more user-friendly and the ability to apply rules to MAC addresses, for example, if I wanted to allow a certain MAC address access at a particular time I cannot make this adjustment."
"ISE is a little clunky. The front-end feels like it is from the 1980s."
"Cisco ISE could be simplified somewhat. I would also prefer certificate-based authentication over confirmation-based authentication for all the processes. It's possible for us to do a workaround, but the process needs to be simplified."
"Third-party integration is important, as well as the continuous adaptation feature which is the AIOps. It would be helpful to include the AIOps."
"It would be nice if it could be configured easily by default."
"The documentation needs to be improved. There are a lot of details that are missed which makes it confusing."
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 61 reviews while Pulse Policy Secure is ranked 13th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 1 review. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.0, while Pulse Policy Secure is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Secures devices and has good support, but needs a better interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pulse Policy Secure writes "Has documentation available and can integrate with other vendors, however it's not a straightforward setup". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, Fortinet FortiNAC, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Pulse Policy Secure is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform and Fortinet FortiNAC.
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.