We performed a comparison between Aruba ClearPass and ExtremeControl 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."I like the integration options with a multitude of other vendors and Aruba applications."
"The web dashboard and the policy manager are very intuitive and very easy for the engineers to use."
"ClearPass is open to any operating system or mobile app."
"The customized modules for guests, the self-registration and login, one license for all, no license for guest users, and the self-integration of sandbox integration are the most valuable features."
"It makes it easy to require robust user authentication for both wired and wireless endpoints, including BYODs."
"Aruba ClearPass has improved the security control in our network environment."
"The solution is highly stable."
"The most valuable feature of Aruba ClearPass is its ease of use and the GUI is user-friendly."
"The solution is easy to use."
"There is information on migrating most of the cloud system's features."
"The company also uses Cisco ISE in other places. I have been told that ExtremeControl is easier to use than ISE. The other reason we prefer ExtremeControl is stability. That's why they chose it for this big hospital in Oslo."
"It has effectively enhanced network security and integrated with other security tools to streamline operations."
"I can know which end users are using which features."
"Aruba needs to improve and the processes must be clear."
"There is room for improvement in terms of scalability."
"Aruba ClearPass could improve the user interface, it is a bit chunky."
"It would be good if ClearPass made it a SaaS solution."
"They should include SMP functionalities."
"Like most security products, ClearPass is difficult to deploy. You need to use the CLI to implement security products from any vendor, so configuring the authentication is complicated."
"Aruba ClearPass has fewer deployment scenarios and flexibility than Forescout."
"We have had some issues with the installation of Aruba ClearPass."
"The installation is easy, it can take between five minutes to four hours depending on the complexity of the environment. The speed of the installation could improve for more complex environments."
"I'd like to have access to more information on the traffic passing through."
"One improvement could be better clarification, namely that the system only works optimally with all components purchased together."
"There isn't enough development for the on-premises controller."
Aruba ClearPass is ranked 2nd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 75 reviews while ExtremeControl is ranked 14th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 5 reviews. Aruba ClearPass is rated 8.6, while ExtremeControl is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Aruba ClearPass writes "Easy to use, multifeatured, and reliable policy management platform for identity authentication and new device onboarding". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ExtremeControl writes "Has a simple setup process, but it could be affordable ". Aruba ClearPass is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Microsoft Intune and Portnox CORE, whereas ExtremeControl is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Aruba ClearPass vs. ExtremeControl 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.