We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Cisco Secure Firewall 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."It provides client provisions and profiling as well as guest access."
"Technical support is okay."
"For us and our clients, the most valuable features of Identity Services Engine are really around the rich contact sharing that ISE gives you."
"It is a good product for what it does...So, it is one of the most critical systems that we have."
"The product is useful for device administration."
"It's easy to change and add policies."
"At the moment, ISE seems to integrate very well with a number of other technologies."
"The posture assessment is a valuable feature because of the ability to do assessments on the clients before they connect to the network."
"My confidence continues to build upon using Cisco firewalls."
"The configuration capabilities and the integration with other tools are the most valuable features. I really like this product. Cisco is one of my favorite brands, and I always think Cisco solutions are very reliable, easy to configure, and very secure."
"They are easy to maintain."
"The Firepower IPS, based on Snort technology, has an amazing detection engine and historical analysis capability of files that eases threat investigations a lot."
"It is a very stable product. I've not had any issues with it. It is a super product, and I won't need to change it anytime soon."
"The most valuable feature is that it's secure."
"The implementation is pretty straightforward."
"Among the top features are integrated threat defence and the fact that each virtual appliance is separate so you get great granular control."
"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."
"Some of ISE's features need to be more agile. For example, we couldn't integrate our data because Cisco needs your data to be in its own format."
"I don't see as many customers as I should adopting the onboarding feature. I think Cisco should make that process a lot easier and less intrusive on the end users' devices."
"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."
"On the network services devices, when you click on filter, the filter comes up. However, when I type in a search and I want to click on something it defaults back to the main page. I keep having an issue with that, and I'm not doing anything wrong."
"The customer server was great but it would have been better for me if they had support in other languages such as Spanish."
"I'm frustrated by the resource consumption and how many resources it needs to run. It takes a lot of RAM. It takes a lot of space and a lot of IO power. It's frustrating to do upgrades because it takes a long time."
"The opinion of my coworkers, and it's mine as well, is that the user interface could use some tender loving care. It seems counterintuitive sometimes. If you go to the logs, it's hard to figure out which one you need to look at."
"FMC could be improved because management with FMC is quite difficult compared to using Firepower web-based management."
"The Cisco ASA device needs overall improvement, as configurations alone do not completely secure my network."
"The product needs real-time logs to be able to monitor our services, so we can know if any our services have been blocked via the firewall or on the application side."
"The IPS module is combined with the main operating system."
"The ease of use needs improvement. It is complex to operate the solution. The user interface is not friendly."
"This is an older product and has reached end-of-life."
"I would like it to be easier to work with and have a better user interface. It is not straightforward. You need to know the Cisco command-line interface."
"Integration aspects and traffic shaping need improvement."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Cisco Security Portfolio with 136 reviews while Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Cisco Security Portfolio with 404 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Cisco Secure Firewall 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 Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Portnox CORE, whereas Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX and Sophos XG. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Cisco Secure Firewall 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.