

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) and ThreatLocker compete in the cybersecurity space, with ISE focused on network control and ThreatLocker on application control. ThreatLocker seems to have an upper hand due to its straightforward deployment and user-friendliness compared to ISE's complex setup.
Features: Cisco ISE offers extensive compatibility with 802.1X, TrustSec, and centralized security management. It integrates with Cisco products like IDS and Catalyst switches, includes RADIUS support for Active Directory integration, and facilitates MAC Address Bypass. ThreatLocker emphasizes application control, ring-fencing, and allowlisting within a Zero Trust framework, effectively blocking unauthorized software and providing elevation control for administrative actions.
Room for Improvement: Cisco ISE's complexity in setup and troubleshooting, coupled with insufficient documentation, can encumber users. Its technical interfaces and scalability are also noted as challenging areas. ThreatLocker could benefit from more intuitive built-in rule sets and the addition of antivirus capabilities. Users have also suggested more flexible training schedules and enhanced ticketing transparency.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco ISE is favored mainly in on-premises and hybrid deployments, benefiting from specialized TAC and partner support, though it sometimes faces slow resolution times. ThreatLocker offers straightforward installation across on-premises and cloud environments, with consistent and supportive customer service, though international deployment costs can be higher.
Pricing and ROI: Cisco ISE's pricing is perceived as high and complex, potentially restrictive for smaller entities, though valuable for large organizations with comprehensive security integration needs. ThreatLocker, by contrast, provides a competitive pricing model conducive to scalability and robust cybersecurity protection, delivering positive ROI through reduced threat exposure and streamlined security processes.
Direct comparisons with Forescout reveal up to 30% to 40% difference in cost savings.
We also save money because we increased security, stopped incidents, and reduced breaches and security breaches.
If something were to happen without ThreatLocker, the cost would be huge, and thus, having it is definitely worth it.
The main return on investment is peace of mind, knowing that with ThreatLocker on any endpoint, it will almost always block all malicious code or exploits, even zero-day exploits.
It keeps malware, Trojans, and ransomware at bay.
I rate the technical support as one out of ten.
Cisco support has pretty good teams for support and every time we had good answers and we could somehow solve the issues we had.
TAC support from Cisco is a notable feature; it provides very professional support.
They have been very responsive, helpful, and knowledgeable.
I would rate their customer support a ten out of ten.
Their support is world-class.
You can run an all-in-one deployment and switch to distributed mode as your company grows, relying on Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) to support your scalability needs.
Factors like architecture, business nature, and legal limitations such as GDPR affect it.
However, you can have some latency issues depending on where your devices are.
I started off with just the servers, and within a month and a half, I set up the entire company with ThreatLocker.
It seems to primarily operate on the endpoints rather than at a central location pushing out policies.
I would rate it a ten out of ten for scalability.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is considered very reliable and stable.
The stability of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is poor for certain use cases, like authentication.
Sometimes when we have upgrades or failovers with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE), we had some minor issues.
For five years, we have not had a problem.
Once deployed, it downloads the policies locally, so even if the computer doesn't have internet, it doesn't matter.
It has been very stable, reliable, and accessible.
The whole setup works well with Cisco access points and Cisco switches, but when you have multiple vendors in the environment, such as HP switches or access points like Aruba, you'll find they will not work well with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE).
Pricing can be more expensive compared to other vendors, and there is a significant price gap observed, which doesn't seem justified by some specific features.
They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases.
Controlling the cloud environment, not just endpoints, is crucial.
This is problematic when immediate attention is needed.
Comprehensive 24-hour log monitoring is a valuable enhancement for both business and enterprise-level users.
Compared to other solutions like HPE ClearPass, Cisco is more costly, and the conversation suggests a possible forty percent price gap compared to competitors.
The license costs can range between $50,000 to $100,000 per year for enterprises.
Cloud solutions are expensive, while on-prem setups with shared environments are cheaper but not effective.
After conversations with other partners, it became clear we underpriced it initially, which caused most of our issues.
We are moving towards the Unified solution, where they basically bundle everything together, providing us better stability with the ability to bring in new product offerings without having to go back to the customer and say, 'This is going to cost you.'
I had a really good deal at the time, and it continues to be cost-effective.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) offers authentication using RADIUS, enhancing network security by separating and segregating networks.
There is value because it helps us secure the network and prevents certain things from happening which could cause financial loss.
The adaptability of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) policy enforcement can fit to the site we have depending on which kind of devices we have on site and then the needs for authentication, granting access and then assigning each device into its correct network for segmentation.
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's ability to block access to unauthorized applications has been excellent.
It protects our customers.
The major benefit is fewer breaches overall, as nothing can be run without prior approval. This helps my company protect its data and secure itself effectively.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) | 22.4% |
| ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform | 1.1% |
| Other | 76.5% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 44 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 32 |
| Large Enterprise | 91 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 32 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 4 |
| Large Enterprise | 3 |
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) offers comprehensive network access control and visibility, supporting features like 802.1X authentication, profiling, and posturing. It integrates with Microsoft and other Cisco products, facilitating robust security policies across distributed networks.
Cisco Identity Services Engine is a key player in network access control, offering centralized management and a user-friendly interface. It supports zero trust principles and provides strong authentication for wired and wireless networks. ISE's capabilities include granular security policies, enhanced device posturing, and seamless integration, bolstering security infrastructure. Users benefit from its dual authentication through EAP, simplifying access management across networks.
What are the key features of Cisco ISE?In industries like finance, healthcare, and education, Cisco ISE is pivotal for securing wired and wireless networks, implementing BYOD policies, and managing user access. Organizations leverage ISE for effective authentication and authorization, while maintaining compliance with industry security standards.
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform empowers organizations with application control, selective elevation, and ring-fencing to enhance security and prevent unauthorized access.
ThreatLocker provides comprehensive security management using application allowlisting to ensure only approved software operates across servers and workstations. The platform's centralized management simplifies security processes by consolidating multiple tools, and its robust capabilities align with zero-trust strategies by actively blocking unauthorized applications and ensuring compliance. Users note intuitive features such as mobile access, helpful training resources, and responsive support, which effectively reduce operational costs and help desk inquiries. The managed service providers prefer ThreatLocker to maintain network integrity by preventing malicious scripts and unauthorized access attempts. However, users identify room for growth in training and support flexibility, the interface, and certain technical challenges like network saturation from policy updates.
What are the most important features?Organizations utilize ThreatLocker for application allowlisting, ensuring only authorized software operates to prevent unauthorized access efficiently. Deployed across servers and workstations, its features support zero-trust principles and are favored by managed service providers for application management and network integrity.
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.