No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Impulse Point SafeConnect vs macmon Network Access Control comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Impulse Point SafeConnect
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
macmon Network Access Control
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Impulse Point SafeConnect is 1.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of macmon Network Access Control is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
macmon Network Access Control2.6%
Impulse Point SafeConnect1.8%
Other95.6%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

CD
Director of Computer Information Services at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Easy to scale, enforces policies well, and has responsive technical support
A lot of campuses use SafeConnect. It gives us good visibility and enforces policies. It helps enforce network security by scanning devices, making sure they have current and valid antivirus solutions with up-to-date antivirus definitions, and steers our end users by enforcing policy groups and steering them to the right access. Technical support is responsive. The stability is pretty good. It is very easy to scale the product.
SA
Wireless Network Engineer at Forvia
The product is stable and easily connects with clients, but it is not scalable and does not provide deeper troubleshooting
There is no information on the protocol where the clients stop to authenticate. There are some policies, but I don't know whether the device stopped on the authentication or authorization levels. I don't know whether it is getting the right certificate. I have to work on assumptions. If I want to go to the history to see what happened to a client the previous day or two days ago, it will be very hard because the server is used by multiple devices. For every device and user, macmon creates a file into the RADIUS appliance for deep troubleshooting. To troubleshoot, it creates a bunch of files. If I want to check what happened in the history, I have to check all the files. In some cases, there are 100 files. It is impossible for me to go to each file to see where it happens. It will be good to find the file my client authenticated based on the MAC address. Otherwise, the product must have one file for a specific date. I don't have any problem in terms of dates because it's normal. However, having hundreds of files per day is very hard to troubleshoot. The solution must allow users to filter files based on dates. It must provide deeper troubleshooting and reduced log. Also, the RADIUS logs are very huge.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is very easy to scale the product."
"It gives us good visibility and enforces policies, helps enforce network security by scanning devices, making sure they have current and valid antivirus solutions with up-to-date antivirus definitions, and steers our end users by enforcing policy groups and steering them to the right access."
"The API is a great way to get information from other tools."
"When we started with macmon we had immediate success, we could see our network and see the devices and could easily go online."
"The ease of connecting with the client is valuable for me."
"We use it with our Cisco switches so we can see which switch it is actually connected to."
 

Cons

"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
"The single sign-on process can be improved and the interface should be made more user-friendly."
"The service macmon offers is already great."
"The solution must allow users to filter files based on dates."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For our tier group, for one year, the cost is probably around $10,000 for the license. If you do multi-year, you could get two years, and you could get it for about $8,000 per year. If you do three years, you get it around $7,000 a year."
"The solution is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Also Known As

SafeConnect
macmon NAC
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aerohive Solution
More than 1,500 installations in all over Europe in all industries: Stepchange, Volkswagen, Vivantes Healthcare, MBDA Weapons, APS engineering, Alfred Ritter GmbH (Ritter Sport), Haßberg-Kliniken, 1. FSV Mainz 05 eV., Siempelkamp, AEB etc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, ThreatLocker and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.