Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs Forcepoint ONE comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Identity Services Eng...
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
139
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (1st), Cisco Security Portfolio (1st)
Forcepoint ONE
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (26th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (10th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) and Forcepoint ONE aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is designed for Network Access Control (NAC) and holds a mindshare of 29.9%, down 31.4% compared to last year.
Forcepoint ONE, on the other hand, focuses on Secure Web Gateways (SWG), holds 2.0% mindshare, up 1.8% since last year.
Network Access Control (NAC)
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Adarge Ekholt - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 3, 2023
The ability to see what devices are online for a particular user helps a lot with our troubleshooting
Another big benefit for us is definitely security in terms of wireless user activity. We spent a lot of time looking at live logs and user logs to figure out where they've been in the network and in which buildings. We can get rogue granular with locations of where people are and where they're experiencing issues. We have definitely saved time since using ISE when it comes to building some of the policies around the types of users, like library users versus student union or even admin users. The policy building is complicated, but after a while, it's pretty straightforward in terms of repeatability of staff turnover, and things like that. It's not the learning curve that's hard for continuous maintenance.
Edwin Eze-Osiago - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 24, 2023
Easy to deploy, stable, and scalable
We use Bitglass for real-time scanning and its unique VM that enables reverse proxy capabilities. Bitglass can also act as an IDP for us when we don't have an identity provider The solution enforces our devices no matter where it is located even across our cloud devices reducing the manual work…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I like the guest access feature, which has been important for us."
"When we use ISE, one of the helpful things is that I can go through the dashboard and get every step along the way of how a device was authenticated. If it's failing, why did it fail? Why is it unauthorized? If there's an error, what is the error and how can I fix that error? If it's something that, if they should be passing, why are they failing?"
"I've had no issues with scalability. I started using it on two campuses, and now I'm using it across the country and scaling it across subsidiaries in other countries."
"The solution enables us to do everything from one interface."
"Cisco ISE's profiling and posturing features ensure that all devices are compliant with regulatory authorities."
"There are a lot of integrations available with multiple vendors. This has made the solution easier to work with."
"Cisco ISE is a powerful solution. It gives us the ability to control who's accessing our network, and Cisco has made it very easy."
"The solution is great for establishing trust for every access request no matter where it comes from."
"The solution is very good when it comes to securing us against data leakage, because of the other proxy. It also has API scanning or data at rest. It inspects data in motion, which is the proxy, and then it has the data at rest, which is the API scanning. We can inspect for anything we want: file fingerprinting, PHI-sensitive data, PCI-sensitive data. It does not matter. We can usually find it and block it in transit and do our remediation with it. It could either be block, encrypt, or allow and watermark the file to follow it and see where it goes. It allows for those different scenarios."
"The core CASB solution is the most valuable part. It allows us to put policies in place around which devices can log into our cloud applications. We have a policy that states that only company devices can access these cloud applications."
"The initial setup was straightforward, which was a huge win. That mostly goes to the fact that they are agentless. We didn't have to sit there deploying thousands of agents and all the things that go along with that type of deployment. We were up and running very quickly."
"The most valuable features of Forcepoint include Zero Trust Network Access and remote user protection for private applications."
"The solution’s AJAX-VM provides constant reverse proxy uptime. It has been very positive for our security operations. When people are trying to access the SaaS solution, it protects us from downloading any of that data and experiencing any type of attacks"
"The setup is relatively straightforward."
"The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules."
"Forcepoint ONE is okay for me, and I find it a very good solution. Its most valuable feature is monitoring. Its monitoring is very good, and it can communicate with a SIEM system. I also find the DLP feature of Forcepoint ONE good."
 

Cons

"There is room for improvement in CLI. Most things are done through the GUI, and there aren't many commands or troubleshooting options available compared to other Cisco products like switches and routers."
"The learning curve is steep and the initial setup is complex."
"It should be virtualized because many people have begun migrating to the cloud. They should offer a hybrid version."
"The UI is not as intuitive as some other products, even products inside of Cisco's wheelhouse."
"The primary issue is the slowness of the application and the web interface. We have multiple admin nodes and app nodes. So when I need to get some information about a particular user, the GUI would take ten to fifteen seconds in loading when we need to know right away."
"The intuitiveness of the user interface could be improved."
"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."
"Cisco ISE does not recognize devices and that is an issue we faced during its integration with our existing devices."
"We encounter challenges in determining whether certain features for blocking certain file types or preventing automatic downloads are functioning correctly."
"One area for improvement in Forcepoint ONE is that you'll need more training to install the solution yourself. I practiced in a laboratory and I needed more technical information to do the installation."
"In our environment, when an Active Directory password changes, we tend to have some latency issues with access. It takes about 15 minutes before that password is accessible through Bitglass after the change. That would be the major thing I see as a negative."
"The solution's integration with other products needs improvement."
"Their new SASE (secure access service edge) product would have been the one thing I would have requested. Now that they have that platform, I'd like to see it as integrated and seamless as possible with the core product. That's what they're working towards and that's where we're seeing the advancements."
"Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement."
"Initially, we had some challenges that Bitglass resolved quickly. The challenges were around communication. There didn't seem like there was the right level of communication within the Bitglass organization. Once we brought the issues up at a higher level, then they were resolved."
"I wish they would advance more into the endpoint DLP solution. Currently they do not do anything around endpoint, they're still strictly cloud-based. The forward proxy is really the only thing they do. What I would like to see them do is to scan machines, workstations and servers, for information we might not want on those machines. That would be huge."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Being fully honest, the Cisco licensing model right now is really confusing. We don't know what licenses we have where. We have Smart licensing, but the different levels are way confusing."
"It would be beneficial to have a single license that included all of the features."
"The solution’s pricing is okay."
"We are running Version 2.9 because Version 2.9 of the ISE has a persistent license — it's a one-time payment. The latest version (3.1) is only available if you do a yearly subscription."
"There is a license to use this solution and the price is reasonable."
"The price can be lower, especially for subscriptions. It should be a lot cheaper to have a wide range of customers. The price should be comparable to competitive products like Forescout or Fortinet FortiNAC. Forescout is cheaper for customers looking for a cloud solution."
"The price is okay."
"If you consider money only, Cisco ISE is not a cheap solution."
"There is training involved. If you're going to add more people to it, such as cross train more of your group, there's a cost. Other than that, that's it. We have paid exactly what the invoices have said. We signed a three-year contract and not gone above it."
"The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three."
"We have our pricing by user. We do our pricing agreements annually. There are also additional costs for maintenance."
"When considering only the cost, the solution may appear to be costly; however, when evaluated in terms of commercial value, Bitglass is not expensive."
"Typically, the longer you price forward, the better off you're going to be. They have been very willing to work with us on pricing."
"The licensing cost for Forcepoint ONE would depend on the features, but the pricing is very competitive here in Brazil. The solution offers a good price, and I would rate it a three or a four in terms of pricing. I don't have information on whether there are additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees for Forcepoint ONE."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
801,634 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
25%
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Aruba Clearpass or Cisco ISE?
Aruba ClearPass is a Network Access Control tool that gives secure network access to multiple device types. You can adapt the policies to VPN access, wired, or wireless access. You can securely ...
What are the main differences between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform?
OK, so Cisco ISE uses 802.1X to secure switchports against unauthorized access. The drawback of this is that ISE cannot secure the port if a device does not support 802.1x. Cameras, badge readers, ...
How does Cisco ISE compare with Fortinet FortiNAC?
Cisco ISE uses AI endpoint analytics to identify new devices based on their behavior. It will also notify you if someone plugs in with a device that is not allowed and will block it. The user exper...
What do you like most about Forcepoint ONE?
The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint ONE?
The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint ONE?
The solution's integration with other products needs improvement.
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
Bitglass
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, BC Hydro, Beachbody, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Cisco IT, Derby City Council, Global Banking Customer, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, Houston Methodist, Linz AG, London Hydro, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Molina Healthcare, MST Systems, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Reykjavik University, Wildau University
UNC-Charlotte
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: September 2024.
801,634 professionals have used our research since 2012.