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

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs Fortinet FortiToken comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Identity Services Eng...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
141
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (1st), Cisco Security Portfolio (1st)
Fortinet FortiToken
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) and Fortinet FortiToken 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 27.9%, down 31.8% compared to last year.
Fortinet FortiToken, on the other hand, focuses on Authentication Systems, holds 6.6% mindshare, down 7.4% since last year.
Network Access Control (NAC)
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

SunilkumarNaganuri - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced device administration hindered by complex deployment and security limitations
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication. They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases. This will give them a roadmap for software-defined access (SDA) use cases and network segmentation. Threat detection capabilities are very weak. Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.
Sachin Vinay - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates secure 2FA for admins, facilitates OTP generation, and enhances security
One suggestion is to develop a more user-friendly solution that is cost-effective so that a hardware-based solution can be provided to all users using VPN services or any configuration service requiring confidentiality. This would allow for broader distribution among a larger number of system admins and software engineers, which is currently not feasible with the existing hardware-only approach.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I found the CMDB Direct Connect in Cisco ISE 3.2 the most promising feature for my use case."
"The live logs and live sessions for troubleshooting are the most valuable features because they provide a detailed report of any issues."
"Visitors can be granted access to the wifi network using their cellphones, notebooks or tablets in a very easy way. The ease of accessibility that anyone can have to the network is very quick and is a big improvement in our network."
"The most important feature for us is visibility in terms of user connections. It's the ability to see what devices are online for a particular user that helps a lot with our troubleshooting."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco ISE is its seamless integration with the switches and the entire suite, enabling wireless access and smooth client information retrieval."
"TACACS and .1X security are the most valuable features. TACACS acts for user control, so no one can authenticate to our network devices, and .1X is to validate that unauthorized devices are plugged into our network."
"It's flexible and stable. It's been good as a standard environment to run."
"It has allowed us to pull in multiple authentication databases, then centralize them into a captive portal system."
"Their resolution time is timely, and they provide solutions efficiently."
"The token-based authentication is good and modern aspect."
"I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. The solution is a smart product that anyone can easily access and manage. The solution is a good product for multi-factor authentication and to secure remote authentication in the corporate environment."
"FortiToken is available in a soft or hard token factor, so there's some flexibility in that. Beyond that, I would say it is a stable solution that has worked for us."
"Fortinet FortiToken provides security and authenticates that the right external people are working with a company's system."
"The solution is pretty solid."
"I love the push-button authentication on FortiToken Mobile. It's also great that the soft token automatically reloads the OTP at intervals, so I always have a fresh code to enter."
"The deployment is quick and simple."
 

Cons

"It would be helpful for us to know what needs to be deployed, configured, and what changes we need to make to our devices when we don't receive the specific login which is an indication of a lack of connection or incorrect configuration."
"An area that could be improved is the agent. The challenge now is that agent and most of the computers have changed. They could think about agent-less deployment."
"Cisco ISE could be simplified somewhat. I would also prefer certificate-based authentication over confirmation-based authentication for all the processes. It's possible for us to do a workaround, but the process needs to be simplified."
"I believe that Cisco can improve the way its policies are built because it's a little complex."
"The policies could be adjusted to make them more easily implementable."
"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."
"Cisco ISE is complex. The deployment and design of networks with it is so complex. If it could change it would be better."
"Some of the reporting could be improved."
"You need your mobile just to enroll the tokens, and sometimes, it's difficult to use for someone who is not knowledgeable"
"The tool could be a little cheaper."
"The solution works well. We have nothing to complain about."
"The solution could introduce a mobile application instead of a physical product."
"I would like to see if FortiToken can integrate with Office 365 mail to support the same two-factor authentication experience that I have with ESET. With ESET, when a user logs in, they are easily directed to the ESET authentication page, where they are prompted to enter their OTP after supplying their username and password. I understand from support that FortiToken cannot do this with email integration. That's why I opted for ESET."
"Configuration can be confusing due to the lack of community and context-sensitive help. We've had to rely on technical support, which slows down the setup process."
"I would like to see complete OAuth support. Also, if they can support it from a SaaS (Software as a Service) or cloud platform, that would be great."
"It needs a lot of coupling with their other Fortinet products. To implement FortiToken, I most probably need to couple it with FortiAuthenticator for full implementation. An RSA token can be used with many devices, whereas Fortinet FortiToken is always linked to only one FortiGate device. If I want to reuse the token across five or six FortiGates, I would have to get the FortiAuthenticator product. I can't use one token to connect to different FortiGates, and I need to get another product to enable this functionality. They should also improve the support for their mobile client. There should be a more detailed roadmap for the operating systems being supported. Some of our users were using an old iOS iPhone, and they were forced to get a newer phone because FortiToken didn't support that version of iOS. Similarly, there may be a version of Android that is not supported, so the users need to change the phone. This was one of the reasons why our deployment took longer."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a license to use this solution and the price is reasonable."
"I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, one being cheap and ten being expensive."
"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."
"In terms of the licensing and the pricing structure of the Cisco Identity Services Engine, there's been a huge advantage to our clients recently with the advent of the enterprise agreement."
"Hardware appliances are expensive...Now moving to DNA-styled licensing, we have subscription-based licensing for everything. I hope it will continue to be fair, but we will have to wait and see."
"This solution requires an annual license and it is a bit expensive than competitors."
"According to my sales and account team, the prices we're getting are pretty good."
"The price for Cisco ISE is high."
"The platform's licensing cost is reasonable for our organization."
"I rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten."
"The solution’s price is good."
"From an Indian perspective, it's definitely costlier."
"Overall, it's cheaper than other solutions. Of course, we evaluated it five years back, and I haven't checked to see its current market position, but one reason we adopted FortiToken is its lower cost of ownership relative to other solutions we evaluated."
"Although the platform is relatively expensive, it offers significant value. I rate the pricing a nine out of ten."
"Fortinet FortiToken is not an expensive solution."
"The solution’s pricing is moderate and reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
28%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
7%
University
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 Fortinet FortiToken?
The solution is simple and similar to Google Authenticator. It follows time-based authentication. We use it for hardware and software in one environment. The tool offers simple and fast authenticat...
What is your primary use case for Fortinet FortiToken?
I am using FortiToken for logging into the Fortinet hardware. I have four FortiGate hardware units. I am connected through a simulator on FortiToken.
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
No data available
 

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
Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.