We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Cisco Secure Email based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cisco Security Portfolio solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The integration with Active Directory is the most valuable feature for us."
"We found all the features of the product to be valuable."
"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."
"They provide you multiple ways to achieve security, not only on-prem, but also when you have remote and guest workers. Especially post-pandemic, a lot of our customers have remote workers. So, it has been really helpful."
"When you push out the policy, it is able to populate the entire network at one time."
"It works as a good RADIUS server. It has lots of features. It works with all the proprietary Cisco AB pairs and features."
"Our clients like Cisco ISE because they already use various Cisco solutions. It's easy for them to use this solution because they have an engineer with Cisco certifications."
"At the moment, ISE seems to integrate very well with a number of other technologies."
"Because we scan products, and there is a lot of critical data, security is very important in these cases."
"ATP has been the most valuable in improving our email security posture."
"There were detailed logs available. That was a seriously good feature... It turns out these were actually spoof emails that came into our environment. I got to know about them from the log system."
"Cisco Secure Email has strong inbound services."
"The most valuable features are protection against ransomware and spam."
"We like the in-built features, like the email filtering based on the IP and domain. Cisco has its own blacklisted domains and IPs, which is very good. This filters around 70 percent of emails from spam, and we are seeing fewer false positives with this."
"Administration of the email domains and custom filters are easily done via the web interface."
"It is doing its work. It is doing what it was actually designed to do. It has ensured we don't have business email compromises, and it has also ensured that our brand Galaxy is unique all year round."
"We would definitely like to see a little bit of an improvement in the web GUI navigation. Some of the things are a little bit hidden in the drop-down menu. If we could get a way to get to those quicker, it'd be much more useful."
"Cisco ISE's performance could be better, faster, and more robust."
"The price could be better. I would like to see more integration with third-party solutions in the next release. This is because many of my clients don't have Cisco."
"Cisco ISE could be simplified somewhat. I would also prefer certificate-based authentication over confirmation-based authentication for all the processes. It's possible for us to do a workaround, but the process needs to be simplified."
"The templates could be better. When you have to do certs, especially with X.500 certs, it isn't very intuitive."
"The interface could be more user-friendly and the ability to apply rules to MAC addresses, for example, if I wanted to allow a certain MAC address access at a particular time I cannot make this adjustment."
"I don't like the fact that we can see the logs only for 24 hours. Maybe that happens because of the way we set it up."
"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."
"I am not satisfied with the solution's reporting and logging."
"Many smaller businesses opt for more cost-effective solutions, such as Gmail or Hotmail accounts, instead of investing in Cisco Secure Email, given its higher cost."
"The initial setup was complex because I have two sites with physical clusters."
"The Forged Email Detection feature needs improvement, particularly with domain. The sensors are not that good and the rules sets are unclear."
"Cisco Email Secure's pricing needs to be less. We have vendors who provide cheaper solutions with the same features."
"There could be additional DLP functionality for it."
"I have some frustrations with the user experience in the interface, specifically with regard to making a list of people for whom I want to allow email access."
"Better dashboards and more interactive overviews would be nice, but the current functionality is sufficient."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Cisco Security Portfolio with 138 reviews while Cisco Secure Email is ranked 10th in Cisco Security Portfolio with 56 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4. 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 Cisco Secure Email writes "Has effortless spam control, improves security posture, and frees up our IT department's time". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Trellix Collaboration Security, Fortinet FortiMail, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) and Proofpoint Email Protection. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Cisco Secure Email report.
See our list of best Cisco Security Portfolio vendors.
We monitor all Cisco Security Portfolio 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.