Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) Reviews

We are using Cisco ISE for limiting port access in our organization's building for wired and wireless networks.

We were originally a Cisco shop and Cisco ISE integrated well with our other Cisco switches and networks.

I have been using Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) for approximately three years.

The solution is stable and has good performance.

Cisco ISE  is scalable.

We have approximately 200 people using this solution in my organization.

When I have contacted the support for Cisco ISE I have always been satisfied.

The installation is not straightforward, it took us approximately one month.

They need to reduce the number of options for the installation or have a wizard that covers small, medium, and large enterprises.

We had an integrator help with the implementation. For the deployment, we had five engineers and for the maintenance and support, we use three engineers.

The price of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is expensive and we are thinking about changing to FortiGate.

I have evaluated Fortinet FortiGate solutions.

I would not recommend this solution.

I rate Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) a six out of ten.

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.

I am a reseller. We also implement solutions for our clients. Currently, we have a client who is doing a proof of concept with different clients of their own.

We sell this product to many different clients here in Mexico for both retail and manufacturing plants.

Our clients use Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) to secure the access of the users. It's a great tool for access control functions.

The profiling model included is the most valuable feature.

The user interface could be improved to make it more user-friendly.

I have been selling Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) for eight years.

Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is very stable.

It is very scalable. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is a nice solution.

I have not had any contact with technical support.

The initial setup is easy.

It can take three days for a basic configuration.

As resellers, we frequently evaluate solutions for our customers.

After the deployment, I would recommend completing a proof of concept.

I would rate Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) a nine out often.

We primarily use the solution in our infrastructure.

I'm very satisfied with the product. It has been excellent so far. 

From the performance perspective, it is excellent. The outcome is as expected, giving control to the network. 

There is good integration with third-party systems like antivirus patch management, MDM.

They need to simplify the processes and management more, as well as the platform. Their user experience is a bit complicated, and it's not easy to manage. They need to do something to enhance the management console and make it more simple and easier to use.

I need to see stronger integration with Cisco SDN. Instead of treating it as a separate appliance, it should be a built-in feature in the SDN solution. This is one of the things that will reduce the complexity of Cisco's architecture. Instead of having multiple appliances, and getting lost in-between, and not knowing where is the problem is, everything can just be in one place. It will be better to move this feature or this technology as a built-in technology in the SDN solutions, similar to DNA and ACI.

The pricing and licensing structure are not ideal for customers.

I've used this solution for about five years, both in my previous company and my current company as well.

The solution provides excellent stability and reliability. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We are a customer and an end-user.

Cisco, on the price, is not good now. This might entice customers or end-users to go for another cheaper solution where they can still find most of the features Cisco offers. 

They are now offering subscription licenses, and you have to pay thousands of dollars every year for maintenance and renewing support. Most users will not accept this new strategy of Cisco. It's not like HP or Dell, where, when you purchase the hardware and it's a lifetime license. It's a lifetime subscription. You don't need to renew the license every two years. Therefore, from a price perspective, no, Cisco's not good. Their strategy now seems to be pushing customers to go for other solutions.

The product is excellent and I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

I am a reseller. I provide solutions to our customers.

We used Cisco ISE for Wi-Fi implementation for one project at the International Airport.

The most valuable features of this solution are guest authentication and stop authentication.

I felt that it was quite good and well suited for us.

Overall, the features and the product are quite good. 

It has all of the features available, in fact, more than what you need.

The initial setup could be simplified.

The support could be faster and the pricing could be reduced.

Cisco ISE is a stable product.

It is a scalable solution.

Technical support is fine.

It might take some time. At times, it will take two hours to come online.

Support is available as long as you have the support contract.

I have not worked on any other product.

The initial setup is a bit complex. The integration with the Active Directory is a bit involved.

The price is a bit on the high side.

The features are quite comprehensive, but it's okay. However, the pricing is on the higher side.

Feature-wise, it is a nine out of ten. Overall, I would rate Cisco ISE an eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used for authentification purposes. 

The solution is stable.

We have found the product to be scalable.

The device administration is great. 

It offers very good integrations and can easily be integrated with mobile devices.

The product works well with StealthWatch.

It's quite an innovative product.

Typically, the installation is pretty simple.

The solution isn't as dynamic as it could be. There are some limitations, specifically around switches. 

Deploying to a machine, as opposed to a dedicated appliance, can be a bit difficult. 

The network solutions need to be improved by Cisco.

I've been using the solution for three to four years. It's been a while at this point. 

The solution has been quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The scalability is good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's not a problem.

We have this solution deployed to 6,000 or more users. 

An installation is pretty simple if it is on a dedicated hardware appliance. However, if someone chooses to deploy to a machine, then you can face certain challenges during the installation. On a dedicated appliance, you can deploy in two to three hours.

You only really need one person to deploy the product. You don't need to have a big team.

We are integrators and can deploy the solution for clients.

We are a systems integration company.

I'm using different versions of the solution, and not necessarily the latest one.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's worked well for us so far. We find Cisco to be innovative and to offer good products. 

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

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 way we can trust this solution is the most valuable. We have no issue with this product. It is a competitive product. You need to have a very good and deep knowledge of the product to take the full benefits of all the features, but it is a good product.

It is too complex. It should be easy to use. We are not such a big team. We only have three engineers to work with this, and we don't use all of the functionality of the product. Its range of functionality is too wide for us, and this is the reason why we are thinking of switching to a more simple product. We have shortlisted a Microsoft solution. We have a big footprint for Microsoft products, especially in security. As a global strategy, we try to leverage to the maximum what is possible around Microsoft.

This product was installed before I joined this company. It would be six years or something like that. We are probably two versions behind the latest one.

It is stable.

Their technical support is good. Cisco support is good.

I was not there, but I think the company had a services company that helped them in implementing it. It was easy because we only had to give them the requirements and their engineers did it for us. After they finished their mission, we started to deal with this solution, but it is too complex for a company of our size.

Its price is probably good if you use all of its features and functionalities to protect your environment. If you use only a part of the functionality, its price is too high. It is just a question of value and the functionality you use.

I would advise others to make sure that you have the knowledge of this solution to get the full benefits of all the features, and you are able to use it on a daily basis.

I would rate Cisco ISE a six out of ten. Its functionality is too wide for our company.