We performed a comparison between Aruba ClearPass and Portnox CORE 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."It's a great solution with multi-vendor support. That's always useful."
"We are mainly using Aruba ClearPass for our clients for securing access to their on-premise assets. As per customer expectations, we are trying our best to track the complete user activity in the network. This is the main and the core feature we require."
"Gives us network access control, visibility, scalability, security, and control in what is becoming an uncontrollable, inundated BYOD and IoT world."
"Aruba has improved my organization because it supported me on my level of access."
"Its clustering model saved us staff time and reduced errors by eliminating the need to manage individual RADIUS servers."
"Support is decent."
"The most valuable features of Aruba ClearPass are the authentication mechanisms and the integration with Active Directory(AD)."
"If you are looking at the base installation, then it was a very straightforward process, which I would rate an eight or nine out of ten."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"Technical support was very helpful when we needed them."
"Previous to the deployment we didn't have complete visibility of all the endpoints, all the devices that are connected to the network. But with the deployment of portnox, we could see all the devices and where they're connecting. We can equally segregate and apply different rules, policies to each location that we didn't monitor specifically."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"It's a stable product."
"The technical support is top-notch."
"There is an add-on feature for application control to kill unwanted applications when launched on a user's device."
"Because some users use OS 10, it would be good if the solution could group its functions better."
"The pricing policy could be more flexible."
"The setup of ClearPass can be a bit convoluted at times."
"The initial setup was quite complex, it is not that easy."
"Aruba ClearPass could improve the complexity of the initial usage. It takes some time to be good at it. It's not simple to build and connect the rules to the network you want to deploy them on."
"Licensing cost is extremely high."
"What needs improvement in Aruba ClearPass is just the endpoint context server, in particular, the indication with the context server because sometimes the daily process isn't as smooth-sailing. Sometimes, the information isn't up-to-date. I'm not sure if that's a vendor limitation, but currently, it's the only tricky part of the current configuration. What I'd like to see in the next release of Aruba ClearPass is a dashboard or a monitoring feature that would allow users to see the integration process with an external server because there's no visibility into that right now."
"ClearPass' GUI could be more user-friendly."
"The price could be better."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
Aruba ClearPass is ranked 2nd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 75 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 11th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews. Aruba ClearPass is rated 8.6, while Portnox CORE is rated 8.2. 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 Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". Aruba ClearPass is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Microsoft Intune and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM), whereas Portnox CORE is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Portnox Clear and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Aruba ClearPass vs. Portnox CORE 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.