We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and macmon Network Access Control 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."They have recently made a lot of improvements. My clients don't have much to complain about."
"It's keeping our company safe from rogue devices connecting to our network. From a security standpoint, there's peace of mind knowing that every device that connects is a good one."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco ISE is its seamless integration with the switches and the entire suite, enabling wireless access and smooth client information retrieval."
"The access policies, and all of the policies in Cisco ISE, are important to us."
"It's easy to change and add policies."
"It has allowed us to pull in multiple authentication databases, then centralize them into a captive portal system."
"Among the most valuable features is TACACS."
"For me, the TACACS feature is the most valuable. I have also used Cisco ISE with LDAP, not with Active Directory. That works for me because I prefer LDAP versus Active Directory."
"We use it with our Cisco switches so we can see which switch it is actually connected to."
"The ease of connecting with the client is valuable for me."
"The API is a great way to get information from other tools."
"It is a good product, but in order to use all of the functions of the product, you must have a good understanding of the product. You must know how to use and manage it. It is a little bit complicated to configure and manage. It must be simplified to make it easy to manage for end users. In the initial stage, we found ISE complicated for end users. It was not easy to manage it or to write authentication and authorization protocol. They must improve its management and make it easy for end users. The monitoring and reporting capabilities can be improved because end users want to quickly see what is happening in their network. There were some restrictions in working with other vendors. It should also have a better and easy integration with other vendors."
"The knocks I have against the product are the number of bugs that we encounter, constantly, and the amount of upgrading that we have to do."
"In an upcoming release, it would be nice to have NAC already standard in the solution."
"In the next release, I would want to see this kind of solution in the cloud as opposed to on prem because when enhancements are made to the software, if it's in the cloud, it's overnight. I mean you're not going to have to respin the servers that the license sits on, it's all microservices kinds of things in the cloud. That would be my recommendation. If I'm a customer, that's what I'm looking at - for cloud based software subscriptions."
"There should be more visibility into TrustSec policy actions. When TrustSec blocks something or makes any kind of changes to the network, we don't always see that. We have to log into the switch itself, or we have to get some type of Syslog parsing to do that."
"In an upcoming release, the solution needs to be more agentless and more independent. Additionally, there could be improved integration with other next-generation solutions, such as Palo Alto, Fortinet, or Check Point."
"Cisco ISE's performance could be better, faster, and more robust."
"The pricing is fair."
"The solution must allow users to filter files based on dates."
"The single sign-on process can be improved and the interface should be made more user-friendly."
"The service macmon offers is already great."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More macmon Network Access Control Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 135 reviews while macmon Network Access Control is ranked 9th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 3 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while macmon Network Access Control is rated 8.6. 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 macmon Network Access Control writes "A robust solution that provides protection to effectively control the access to your network". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas macmon Network Access Control is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC and Forescout Platform. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. macmon Network Access Control 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.