We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Sophos 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."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."
"The feature that I most like is that it can notify me whenever someone plugs in their device, which is not allowed. I get notifications for new laptop devices. I think the user interface looks good compared to previous versions."
"The solution cuts down on the repercussions of getting malware or ransomware."
"It is stable and easy to use."
"The most valuable features are the ability to retrieve information about Active Directory user names, viewing the log files to see which MAC address tried to connect with the created SSIDs, portal designing for your company, hotspot tools, and creating network rules for WiFi access."
"The core point is that Cisco ISE is the same globally compared to FortiAuthenticator. Whether I deploy in China, the US, South Africa, or wherever, I'm can get all the capabilities. It allows me to directly integrate with 365, and from a communications point of view, that is a good capability."
"Cisco ISE integrates with everything else."
"It's easy to change and add policies."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"There is really good visibility for the appliance."
"The solution offers very good visibility."
"Sophos' technical support is great, very fast and responsive, and they always know how to fix the problem."
"The wifi control is fantastic and makes it very easy to administer."
"The installation is very straightforward."
"The most valuable features of Sophos Network Access Control are the quick response times to threats and reliable security."
"I am very satisfied with this solution overall. All of the features that we use have been working successfully."
"The compliance and posture don't always work. They should make it more stable. With each upgrade, we lose some functionality. We have to wait for another upgrade."
"Deploying to a machine, as opposed to a dedicated appliance, can be a bit difficult."
"Cisco ISE is very complex and not very easy to deploy."
"Difficult to figure out the protocols and nodes in order to implement correctly."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for every access request. We have had a little bit of a challenge with profiling, but we are probably about 80% there."
"Profiling is a really good feature. However, it sometimes is a challenge for customers when there are issues with the remediation part. I would add a built-in remediation solution. That would be a very nice feature."
"In a future release, I would like to see network access control. That is something that customers seem to be looking for."
"The intuitiveness of the user interface could be improved."
"I would like to be able to fully customize the reports."
"What needs to be improved on is the fact that Sophos consumes a lot of processor resources and, once it starts scanning, the RAM utilization is very high."
"I would like more details on the incoming connection, like what is the download speed and how it fluctuates. If Sophos can give that information, it would be really good."
"An area that could be improved is the information about licensing, which is fairly confusing at present."
"The solution could offer more useful documentation."
"Sophos Network Access Control requires a lot of resources to work, which is an area for improvement. Pricing could also be improved because it's costly."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"The solution could increase the integration with other platforms or other systems. This would be very useful."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sophos Network Access Control Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 138 reviews while Sophos Network Access Control is ranked 8th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 18 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Sophos 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 Sophos Network Access Control writes "Reliable with good security capabilities and an easy setup". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Sophos Network Access Control is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Ruckus Cloudpath and Twingate. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Sophos 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.