The RADIUS Server holds the most value.
The TACACS feature in ISE is good.
We also use the Posture feature to control the environment.
The product features are quite good.
The RADIUS Server holds the most value.
The TACACS feature in ISE is good.
We also use the Posture feature to control the environment.
The product features are quite good.
One of the main issues in Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is that it lags excessively.
Sometimes Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) just doesn't work properly, due to misconfiguration.
I would like to see the product simplified more, especially with the configuration.
I have been working with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) for approximately two years.
We are using version 2.7 Patch 2.
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is easy to scale.
I have approximately 450 Apex end-based licenses.
Currently, we don't have plans to expand.
Technical support as always is one of the best.
The initial setup was a bit complex. It took us three to four weeks to complete the setup and get it up and running. We had help from the reseller.
It was deployed by a vendor.
It was installed by a vendor.
It's a bit expensive, especially the licensed product.
The hardware is purchased one time.
The support license is reasonable, but when compared to other products, such as ClearPass or Fortinet, the base license for users is much lower in other products. In general, Cisco is more expensive.
I would like to see one license based on one user. We do not need to use multiple licenses in order to have multiple features in the product.
One of the issues in ISE is that if you need more features you have to have multiple licenses per user. One user can have three or four licenses.
It would be beneficial to have a single license that included all of the features.
We are currently trying to deploy Fortinet network access control. The support from Fortinet is disappointing.
We are in the testing phases, but there is a good possibility that we will go with Fortinet.
We have not used it yet. We will try the POCs this week coming.
I would suggest having an experienced engineer implement the product. If there is an error when implementing, you will experience many issues, especially lagging.
If it was well implemented I would rate it a nine out of ten, because it's good.
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is used in large enterprise companies. In our company and with our implementation, I would rate Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) a four out of ten.
We use this solution for both wired and wireless network access control. We have deployed it in a bank, government offices, and some universities.
I have found that all of the features are valuable.
It is very easy to deploy because we are able to port users directly from Active Directory (AD) and LDAP.
In an upcoming release, the solution needs to be more agentless and more independent. Additionally, there could be improved integration with other next-generation solutions, such as Palo Alto, Fortinet, or Check Point.
I have been using this solution for approximately nine years.
The solution takes a while to get up and running before it becomes stable. There is a lot of fine-tuning that needs to be done to make sure that users are authenticated properly and not denied access. I have had the experience of redeploying the ISE several times because of false denial of services or access to services but once it is configured correctly the stability is fine.
I have found this solution is scalable, especially the latest versions. The older versions, have to have some additions in order to make them scalable. However, I think they have resolved this issue.
We have had customers of all business sizes using this solution, from small to enterprise companies.
The community support is satisfactory, it is very easy to get support. You can find any documentation and support within the community.
The deployment takes a long time. Additionally, if you want to integrate the solution with AD and LDAP you will need someone that is very experienced. It is a good feature to have but it is complex to integrate.
We have had experience deploying this solution to small, medium, and enterprise size companies.
This solution requires an annual license and it is a bit expensive than competitors.
I rate Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) an eight out of ten.
The primary use case is to have network access control and automation to integrate with the enterprise network. It also helps provide a method to make segmentations between users and enable access control.
Cisco ISE has provided more mobility for the organization while controlling access no matter how the users connect to the network.
I like the guest access feature, which has been important for us. The BYOD feature is also good.
Segmentation can be improved. They can also improve security policies for each group of users, and automation can also be better. The software interface could be better. They should make it easier for users to find features.
I have been working with Cisco ISE for more than three years, but in general, I have more than 20 years of experience working with Cisco.
Cisco ISE is a stable solution.
Cisco ISE is very scalable.
Cisco technical support is very good.
The initial setup is complex, and you can't easily find the features you want.
If we're talking about a medium enterprise and there is a greenfield, it can take between one or two weeks.
I think the price is okay.
I advise new users to go through the admin guides for implementation and follow the script very carefully.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco ISE an eight.
We are a system integrator and Cisco ISE is one of the products that we sell and implement at our customers side. I have built ISE's POC and provided training to our customers.
I also used real rent lab which was including; Active Directory integration, network access and core switches, access points, wireless access controller, and end points. (some end points have cisco client - anyconnect, and have not), and Web Server for creating wireless authentication portal solution end to end
The AAA features were awesome and have important attributes, and also the security groups (SGTs) concept to enforce policies for each group of users, regardless they coming via wired or wireless network devices. also i see the guest authentication is very rich and easy tom implement
Cisco ISE offer one central point to create different policies for different group of users and enforce policies to each entity regardless it connected to network through wired or wireless network devices. it provide in this way more mobility and wireless-wired converged network. Also it integrates very well with network devices to control ports configurations services authentication and authorization. ISE also integrate with DNA center and stealthwatch to enable customer have SDN (Software defined Network) Fabric.
Combines authentication,authorization,accounting(AAA),posture,and profilerinto one appliance
Provides for comprehensive guest access management for Cisco ISE administrators.
Enforces endpoint compliance by providing comprehensive client provisioning measures and assessing the device posture for all endpoints that access the network,including 802.1X Environments
EmploysadvancedenforcementcapabilitiesincludingTrustsecthroughthe use of SecurityGroup Tags(SGTs) and Security Group Access Control Lists (SGACLs)• Supports scalability to support a number of deployment scenarios from small office to large enterprise environments
The ISE software needs to be improved in role to be easier to administer. SOftware enhancement required to have easier way to find the featured required to implement and also need enhancement of features sorting. Completing processes can be complex when try to implement some solutions. also steps are complex and the troubleshooting as well. As an example, if you intend to make AAA policy and enforce it on a group of users, you will find the software very confusing................................
I have been using Cisco ISE for three months.
We did not use another similar solution prior to this one.
The initial setup was fine.
The price for Cisco ISE is high.
We did not evaluate other options before adopting this solution.
We use Cisco ISE for network management, user access for enterprise clients, and advanced firewall support. We use Cisco ISE on domains and clients jointly with other network software utilities.
We use Cisco ISE as our main controller for the management of clients that need to join our network.
The best feature of the Cisco ISE platform is that it is compatible with Microsoft products.
Cisco ISE is complex. The deployment and design of networks with it is so complex. If it could change it would be better.
It needs a better solution for reduced complexity.
I think to add more people to four-thousand users is going to be hard. Cisco needs to make it easier to add more people.
The Cisco ISE platform is stable.
On our network, we use Cisco ISE as a platform utility to support three thousand users.
The initial setup of the Cisco ISE platform was complex and the deployment was also difficult.
On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco ISE an eight because the server is so complex. Cisco needs to re-program or re-issue it and release a new version with more adequate sizing for small businesses.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) version 1.3 has improved it's GUI margin and much easier to navigate than the previous versions.
This technology pride itself with Trust Sec and 802.1x feature. Trust Sec can be an advantage when an environment is nothing but a Cisco workshop.
This technology is based upon utilizing other Cisco products such as IDS, IPS, ASA and Catalyst switches. It provides the RADIUS feature for Active Directory so that 802.1x (EAP over LAN) is properly utilized for User Authentication.
It also does MAC Address Bypass (MAB) for MAC Address verification and authentication.
Cisco will integrate the TACACS+ feature into ISE version 2.0 and enterprises no longer need Cisco ACS for this reason.
Many organizations and large enterprises are faced with the daunting task of keeping their security issues at bay. They also need to be in compliant with the Cyber Security's strict guidelines and orders.
While there are many cyber attacks from the outside of the edge routers, cyber attacks can also be implemented within the organization whether it is either intentional or unintentional. Cisco ISE can mitigate many attacks such as MAC spoofing, VLAN hopping, DHCP Starvation and ARP Snooping.
By implementing ISE, it can lighten the overhead of the Cisco Catalyst Switches by not implementing port security, Dynamic Arp Inspection, DHCP Snooping. This will also improve the switch's performance since the ISE server takes over the duty of posturing with its Policy Service Node persona.
Cisco ISE has improved performances on Access Switches and closely monitored the daily suspicious or rogue activities within the organization.
We've had no issues with deployment.
We've had no issues with stability.
We've been able to scale it for our needs.
We use Cisco ISE to develop products for other people. We don't really use it in our system. We just buy it and implement it when our customers require ISE.
I like that Cisco ISE is easy to use.
Migration could be better. Right now, we back up with the new version, and it requires a lot of licensing and other things. Whenever we choose a product, it's very difficult because we have to meet the requirements of each feature. There is no standard feature, so the best system that we bought may not fit the solution.
We have to look at every feature that the customer uses. If you compare it with other products like Aruba, it's not the same. With Cisco, I have to read all about the features on this version and the licensing required for the product. In Aruba, that thing is covered when you get one license because it covers almost everything. It could also be more scalable.
We have been using Cisco ISE for 20 to 30 years.
It could be more scalable. It's easy to scale initially, but it will become very difficult at a certain point. In the beginning, it's in the previous environment, and it's pretty easy. But after we integrate it, we need to do a couple more to scale the product, which is more difficult.
We have less than 300 people using it worldwide. We deal with an airline company, so people who come to use it aren't many, but it's available to everyone from everywhere around the world.
We deal with a local Cisco partner for technical support. I haven't dealt with Cisco directly in Bangkok.
I think Cisco takes around six months to complete the migration from the old one to the new one. This is because we have compliance and a lot of other things here.
Our in-house team implements this solution. It takes about three people to maintain this solution.
It costs around 50,000 baht in the first year, but I'm unsure about the second year.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco ISE a seven.
My primary use case is network address translation and layer 4 filtering.
Without this product, we wouldn't be able to use our public ID the way we need to.
The most valuable feature is the ASDM - the user interface makes it very easy to configure the firewall.
I would like the product to include support for OSVS version three.
I've been using this solution for about five years.
This is a stable product.
The scalability is good - currently, we don't have an internet bandwidth greater than 10GB, so it's efficient for us.
The initial setup was straightforward, and deployment was done in one night.
I implemented using an in-house team.
This product has helped us protect our infrastructure.
I considered some open source solutions, but those are usually difficult to set up.
I would recommend this solution as it is very easy to set up and has a very easy user interface. I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.