We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Skybox Security Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."Cisco ISE scales exceptionally well."
"Improves switch account management."
"It provides client provisions and profiling as well as guest access."
"The product is useful for device administration."
"I like that Cisco ISE is easy to use."
"The first benefit is that we can implement zero trust architecture because of Cisco ISE. I can assure my CISO in my company that my network is such that nobody can just bring in their laptop, desktop, or any sort of mobile device and can directly get connected to my network. That is a benefit that I can only allow people who I trust on the network."
"It's flexible and stable. It's been good as a standard environment to run."
"Typically, the installation is pretty simple."
"Aside from Firewall Assurance, we are using Network Assurance and Change Manager for an overview of the whole network and for documenting requests and the recertification of the ruleset."
"It's very supportive and very user-friendly."
"It shows me a client's or an organization's entire network. I can see everything."
"The most valuable feature is the compliance, whether it's access compliance or the configuration compliance, to make sure that all of our devices are configured as they're supposed to be, to limit access as much possible, to follow least-access guidelines."
"The features that I have found most valuable with Skybox Security Suite, and this is because I work on the security side, are the firewall assurance, the change manager and the vulnerability control. These three features are the most impressive from Skybox Security."
"The most valuable features are Firewall Assurance and Vulnerability Control."
"It can be integrated with a vulnerability management solution. When a client comes, apart from pitching network and firewall change management, we are recommending having vulnerability management. So, rather than just having the audit of the firewall, they can integrate it with their vulnerability management solution, which could be Rapid7, Qualys, or any other solution. This provides them the most value out of the platform. That is the way we are approaching our customer base."
"Skybox deployment is simple, and it's very useful."
"I think some areas where ISE could be better are perhaps in the number of integrations that they offer from a virtual standpoint, as well as having a better and more comprehensive pathway for the customer to go from a physical environment to a virtual one."
"In order to make it a ten, it should be more user-friendly. You need somebody who is knowledgeable about it to use it. It's not easy to use. We have to rely heavily on technical support."
"The initial setup process is complex since there are so many big components."
"The UI and UX could be more seamless and easier to use."
"The licensing documentation needs to be better."
"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."
"If Cisco could grant more control, the features could be more focused on network and security administration, reducing the need for integration with other components."
"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."
"It's expensive."
"The support could be improved."
"The price is costly, and I hope they can reduce the cost."
"During implementation, we realised approximately 30 devices were not supported by the Skybox platform."
"There is room for improvement in pricing. It would be better, especially if a customer bought all four modules."
"The solution needs to move improve its interface to a full web browser version that is more accessible and doesn't require installation for use."
"The initial setup with Skybox Security is hard. You need one or two strong security engineers on your team."
"If anything could be improved it would be staying on top of the collector scripts, but I understand that's a very tough challenge."
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 Skybox Security Suite is ranked 19th in Vulnerability Management with 34 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Skybox Security Suite is rated 7.8. 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 Skybox Security Suite writes "Efficient in vulnerability management, stable and easy to use ". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Skybox Security Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, Tufin Orchestration Suite, FireMon Security Manager, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and RedSeal.
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.