We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Sophos Network Access Control 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 return on investment we have seen is related to time in terms of troubleshooting. The logs, such as the security logs, inform us of the issues that people have had. ISE has been very instrumental in helping isolate those issues. We've seen a lot of cost savings because we don't have to pay an IT person to waste time doing something that should be instantaneous."
"It is a good product for what it does...So, it is one of the most critical systems that we have."
"RADIUS is the best feature because it supplies authentication to our entire campus."
"Cisco ISE now competes with any other product in the space because of its centralized and unified highly secure access control with ISE."
"The feature that I found most valuable is profiling. We use that to profile certain types of devices, and then depending on the manufacturer, drop them into the appropriate VLAN without us having to go in and manually add the devices."
"We found all the features of the product to be valuable."
"Cisco ISE's profiling and posturing features ensure that all devices are compliant with regulatory authorities."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco ISE is its seamless integration with the switches and the entire suite, enabling wireless access and smooth client information retrieval."
"I found all Sophos Network Access Control features valuable, but IP blocking is the most useful."
"The pricing is very reasonable and you can negotiate on the price."
"There is really good visibility for the appliance."
"Sophos' technical support is great, very fast and responsive, and they always know how to fix the problem."
"What Sophos has done is integrate almost the entire OSI layer infrastructure. It gives me visibility across my infrastructure. It gives me visibility into all the mobile devices that are on my network and into the security I have on those mobile devices."
"Sophos Network Access Control has a useful interface, and I like its dashboard, which is very useful for us to check everything."
"Sophos has helped us to save time and money and to better manage web activities. It has also helped us to reduce misuse of the network and restrict hacking attempts."
"I am very satisfied with this solution overall. All of the features that we use have been working successfully."
"There is room for improvement in its ability to allow end users to self-enroll their devices. Instead, you should be able to assign that permission by AD group, which is currently not available."
"The interface is a little bit complex."
"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."
"Cisco ISE's real-time data analytics for database logging could be improved."
"It could be more intuitive in terms of how to configure the policies."
"We do tend to run into a lot of issues with ISE when it comes to bugs."
"There are still some bugs in ISE that need to be worked out."
"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..."
"Sophos Network Access Control requires a lot of resources to work, which is an area for improvement. Pricing could also be improved because it's costly."
"It would be beneficial to consider some improvements regarding the dashboard."
"The solution could increase the integration with other platforms or other systems. This would be very useful."
"The interface on the cloud could be a bit better - just to give more performance on it."
"What needs to be improved on is the fact that Sophos consumes a lot of processor resources and, once it starts scanning, the RAM utilization is very high."
"The user interface, in terms of managing the product, could be better."
"I would like to see mobile administration capabilities in the next release so that we can administer the device from a mobile device."
"Sophos Network Access Control needs improvement regarding its slow interface, loading time, and reporting."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sophos Network Access Control Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while Sophos Network Access Control is ranked 7th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 18 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Sophos Network Access Control is rated 8.6. 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 Sophos Network Access Control writes "An affordable solution that provides web protection, URL filtering, and application filtering". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Sophos Network Access Control is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and Ruckus Cloudpath. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Sophos Network Access Control 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.