Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Sophos Network Access Control vs macmon Network Access Control comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

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

macmon Network Access Control
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sophos Network Access Control
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of macmon Network Access Control is 2.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sophos Network Access Control is 1.6%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Yusuf Oezeren - PeerSpot reviewer
A robust solution that provides protection to effectively control the access to your network
The single sign-on process can be improved and the interface should be made more user-friendly. The interface is user-friendly but, for example, when we have new people starting to work, they never work with NetOne and it is a bit hard to expand in certain places. In addition, when I have to pull the last corrected MAC address, I need to put the space between it in order to find the address. If I don't put it in there, I don't get any resources. This needs improvement. They should maybe add integration with LanSuite. We can include it to see the direct information we get from our LAN Tree. If I click on the MAC address, I will then directly get the hostname, and that will open a tap-in line so I see what the last update was.
Vishal Deshwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical support excels but hardware enhancements are needed for faster processing
The best features in Sophos Network Access Control are fewer than FortiNAC and Cisco ISE, but when discussing budget and customer support, different vendors have different perspectives. Cisco is better in support, FortiNAC is better in security, and different vendors maintain different perspectives. I utilized the device quarantine feature around eight months ago. It is specifically for when any malicious or harmful file comes to the system. Through NAC, we can put it in quarantine, and if anything comes or goes from this system, it will be monitored continuously. We can define these parameters as needed. The role-based access controls feature of Sophos Network Access Control allows persons at different positions in an organization to have different types of roles. We can give them full access as an administrator, provide some network access, or give users only read-only access. This depends on the user's requirements and the position they hold within the organization, allowing us to grant roles according to their post. The integration capabilities of Sophos Network Access Control are good, as it can easily integrate with other solutions and vendors.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We use it with our Cisco switches so we can see which switch it is actually connected to."
"The API is a great way to get information from other tools."
"The ease of connecting with the client is valuable for me."
"The pricing is very reasonable and you can negotiate on the price."
"The wifi control is fantastic and makes it very easy to administer."
"We have had interactions with the technical support team through the Xnet platform. It's good."
"The platform's most valuable features include robust reporting and analytics capabilities, which provide deep insights into our sales performance and customer behavior."
"The installation is very straightforward."
"There is really good visibility for the appliance."
"The user interface makes it easy to configure and use."
"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."
 

Cons

"The solution must allow users to filter files based on dates."
"The service macmon offers is already great."
"The single sign-on process can be improved and the interface should be made more user-friendly."
"It would be good if Sophos Network Access Control had better integration with other devices."
"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."
"The solution could increase the integration with other platforms or other systems. This would be very useful."
"Sophos Network Access Control could be improved by having an ASIC chip similar to FortiNAC, as this would provide better processing for big organizations."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"I would like to be able to fully customize the reports."
"The difficult thing was finding the metrics."
"One area in which the product could be improved is the user interface. While functional, it can be somewhat cluttered and unintuitive, especially for new users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is not expensive."
"Sophos Network Access Control is very cheap compared to other solutions like Cisco, Barracuda, and Palo Alto."
"Sophos Network Access Control is an expensive solution."
"It is quite expensive."
"Sophos Network Access Control is costly but has a similar price range as CrowdStrike and Check Point. The product can get more market share if Sophos can play around with Sophos Network Access Control pricing and improve it."
"It provides a moderate pricing option for all of its features and benefits."
"I rate the price of Sophos Network Access Control a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Educational Organization
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
7%
Construction Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about macmon Network Access Control?
The ease of connecting with the client is valuable for me.
What needs improvement with macmon Network Access Control?
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...
What do you like most about Sophos Network Access Control?
Sophos Network Access Control has a useful interface, and I like its dashboard, which is very useful for us to check everything.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sophos Network Access Control?
I am not able to say much on the financial specifics as it pertains to the sales unit.
What needs improvement with Sophos Network Access Control?
For now, I may not be able to say exactly what needs improvement. However, continuous development in specific areas might be required.
 

Also Known As

macmon NAC
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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.
Rushmoor Borough Council
Find out what your peers are saying about Sophos Network Access Control vs. macmon Network Access Control and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.