We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) 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."The solution cuts down on the repercussions of getting malware or ransomware."
"It integrates with the rest of our platform, like our firewall, and helps us a lot. It also does a good job establishing trust for every access request."
"It does what it's supposed to. We use a certificate-based authentication method for corporate-managed devices. That means when a user walks in with their managed laptop and plugs it into the network, it chats with Cisco ISE in the background, allows it on the network, and away they go."
"When you push out the policy, it is able to populate the entire network at one time."
"For customers, it's great. It has a GUI, so the customers themselves can edit ACLs or even modify the policies. It's also an all-in-one solution with RADIUS and TACACS."
"RADIUS is the best feature because it supplies authentication to our entire campus."
"I really enjoy the live log section. Sometimes, you will have someone who is having issues connecting to the network, and then you have to ask them the dreaded question of, "Did you type a password wrong?" They will probably tell you, "No," but the live log can help sort that out. It gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy."
"The implementation is very simple."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"For the information security team, the security level was improved because it helped to manage and prevent rogue devices from connecting to the corporate network. The reporting was granular, and reports we scheduled for delivery on Portnox were useful during investigations and audits, especially in cases where the IP address changed."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"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 easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"It's a stable product."
"Troubleshooting and multi-ISE can be challenging with the solution."
"I'd like to see an easier way to upgrade to larger versions, as well as more best practices that are easier to locate on their support page."
"The solution lacks properly knowledgeable support, especially internationally, and this is why I am exploring other applications."
"Whenever we see the authentication logs, we can't see what device we're logging into... We can see who logged in, but we can't see the IP address of the device... I'm sure that's available. We just haven't figured out how to properly deploy it."
"The software is a little bit complicated to understand in the beginning, meaning the implementation. It needs proper documentation so that we can understand the options more easily."
"The area where things could be improved is education. It's complicated to deploy initially because you have to know what you're getting into."
"It would be nice if it could be configured easily by default."
"There is room for improvement in its ability to allow end users to self-enroll their devices. Instead, you should be able to assign that permission by AD group, which is currently not available."
"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."
"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."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"The integration between Portnox CORE and Portnox CLEAR can be better. These are two different systems, and there is no unique console for both devices. Portnox CORE is agentless, whereas Portnox CLEAR is not agentless."
"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."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"The product should consider more integration with vendors like Huawei. It should also improve visibility. The solution should offer a partner portal that can provide customers training on the in and out of the solution."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 138 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 11th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Portnox CORE is rated 8.2. 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 Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and ExtremeControl, whereas Portnox CORE is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Portnox Clear and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) 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.