We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and ThreatLocker Protect 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 solution enables us to do everything from one interface."
"RADIUS is the best feature because it supplies authentication to our entire campus."
"They provide you multiple ways to achieve security, not only on-prem, but also when you have remote and guest workers. Especially post-pandemic, a lot of our customers have remote workers. So, it has been really helpful."
"It works as a good RADIUS server. It has lots of features. It works with all the proprietary Cisco AB pairs and features."
"The product is useful for device administration."
"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."
"It has all of the features available, in fact, more than what you need."
"In terms of features, I think they've done a lot of improvement on the graphical user interface — it looks really good right now."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting has all of these features integrated into one console, making it effective."
"Application control, ring-fencing, and storage control are the most important features, followed closely by elevation."
"The most valuable feature is selective elevation, which allows elevating an individual process to admin privilege without granting admin privilege to that user, which has been by far the most useful feature outside of the overall solution itself."
"The biggest improvement has been knowing that something unauthorized isn't going to get installed on anyone’s machines."
"Feature-wise, the learning mode and the fact that it's blocking everything are the most valuable. I don't see why more companies don't use the type of product."
"While it can be frustrating at times, we appreciate the low-level security provided by the application whitelist."
"Using ThreatLocker is effortless because I can access it from an app on my phone, so I can help clients after hours. My client had an issue while I was at dinner, and I didn't have a tech on the problem, but I could deal with it from my phone. I can see what the client is doing and approve or deny it. It helps me deliver better service to my clients when they need it."
"Some of the reporting could be improved."
"The opinion of my coworkers, and it's mine as well, is that the user interface could use some tender loving care. It seems counterintuitive sometimes. If you go to the logs, it's hard to figure out which one you need to look at."
"On the network services devices, when you click on filter, the filter comes up. However, when I type in a search and I want to click on something it defaults back to the main page. I keep having an issue with that, and I'm not doing anything wrong."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"The tracking mechanism in Cisco ISE is relatively costly, especially its vendor-specific protocol."
"Segmentation can be improved."
"The solution can lag somewhat as we have a large database."
"If Cisco could grant more control, the features could be more focused on network and security administration, reducing the need for integration with other components."
"One area I see for improvement is in the visibility of support tickets within the ThreatLocker ticketing system."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting needs to improve its user interface and overall workflow."
"If you have a thousand computers with ThreatLocker agents on them, when you approve or create a new policy saying that Adobe Reader that matches this hashtag and meets certain criteria is allowed to be installed, it applies at the top level or the organization level. It applies to every computer in the company. When you make that new policy and push it out and it goes out and updates all of the clients. Unfortunately, at this time, it does not look like they stagger the push-out."
"Adding applications to the allowlist can sometimes feel overwhelming."
"The snapshots used in the ThreatLocker University portal are outdated snippets and have not been updated in conjunction with the portal itself."
"More visibility in the built-ins would be nice."
"ThreatLocker could offer more flexible training, like online or offline classes after hours. The fact that they even provide weekly training makes it seem silly to suggest, but some people can't do it during the day, so they want to train after work. They could also start a podcast about issues they see frequently and what requires attention. A podcast would be helpful to keep us all apprised about what's going on and/or offline training for those people who can't train during the week."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 136 reviews while ThreatLocker Protect is ranked 6th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 13 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while ThreatLocker Protect is rated 9.2. 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 ThreatLocker Protect writes "Integration is simple, deployment is straightforward, and extensive well-written documentation is available online". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas ThreatLocker Protect is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress and GravityZone Business Security. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. ThreatLocker Protect 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.
