Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) Reviews

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 network security.

The most valuable features are the ability to retrieve information about Active Directory user names, viewing the log files to see which MAC address tried to connect with the created SSIDs, portal designing for your company, hotspot tools, and creating network rules for WiFi access.

The interface could be more user-friendly and the ability to apply rules to MAC addresses, for example, if I wanted to allow a certain MAC address access at a particular time I cannot make this adjustment.

In an upcoming release, they could improve by providing rule-based bandwidth consumption, bring your own device (BYOD) need to be more mature, and the reports could be more user-friendly.

I have been using this solution for approximately four years.

The solution is stable.

The controller has to manage a certain number of access points and we did not see any problems with the scalability. It is able to handle more access points than we need it for.

We do not have experience with The technical support from Cisco directly because the technical support we receive is from our partners which they have been excellent.

We have used 3Com wireless controllers previously.

We used Cisco partners to do the implementation of the solution.

Recently, I have evaluated Aruba solutions and I found them to be better than Cisco. There is room for improvement, Cisco can do better.

When deciding to implement this solution it is a good idea to assess and define the requirements to determine whether there is a need for this solution. It is important to know what you can use from it. You can have a WiFi environment without the need for a Cisco ISE. This solution has advanced security that might not be needed for your use case. Be sure about your needs.

I rate Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) a seven 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 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. 

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 primarily use the solution for user authentication and wireless segmentation of users for actual radius purposes.

The actual radius is the most valuable aspect of the solution. We need to have a centric solution either on MarTech X and for the wireless user authentication. We were mainly on Cisco and we continue to use them. However, this is the time period for a refresh as the five-year lifespan is completed. We may look for other options.

Technical support is okay.

The solution is not so user-friendly. It's very difficult to navigate through different manuals. The documentation should be simplified so that it is easier to understand.

It would take time for a beginner to understand and familiarize themselves with the solution. There's a bit of a learning curve.

Cisco ISE is not very stable. They could work on that aspect. 

We'd like the pricing to be better.

The product is not easily scalable.

Currently, if you want to do something with authentication, you need to have an additional document agent, however, these are short on all Microsoft endpoints. We then need to come up with some alternate options so that I don't have to modify any native applications on it. By default, Windows should be able to support and onboard the devices. Right now I need to have a Cisco AnyConnect as an agent to be deployed for authentication.

I've been using the solution for over five years at this point. It's been a while.

The stability of the solution needs to be improved. It's not ideal. It's lacking overall. If we have five or six items activated, the box shakes and we're scared to touch anything. When we do have to reconfigure things, it's a nightmare as it can go down and it can take us a day or two to sort things out.

In terms of scalability, it needs to be reactivated, which means that I need to add more nodes. It's got its own design limitations. We had only a two-node deployment in it. We need to add more hardware and we need to reduce so many things. It's not an easy option to scale this hardware. Scaling, in general, is very difficult.

We have roughly 9,000 users on this product currently.

Technical support is fine. However, we may need to depend on support to resolve some of our many issues. We need to spend an enormous amount of time with them and to explain so much stuff. It would be easier if we could troubleshoot the issue ourselves or if the solution was more reliable.

I don't know about other alternative products. I don't have any experience with other alternative products. I've only ever used Cisco ISE.

The solution's initial setup can be a bit complex as there are so many features that are available. It all depends, however, upon which one you want to activate. In our case, we have five or six activated and the box always shakes. It's not stable. So my colleagues are always afraid to touch the box. If it is working well and good, you don't touch it, and we don't reconfigure it. In cases where we encounter any issues, it's a nightmare and we need to spend a minimum of twenty-four to forty-eight hours to recover everything.

We pay a fee based on a subscription model.

The pricing could always be better.

I've been looking at evaluating Aruba's Clearpass as a potential replacement option for this solution. I haven't gotten too far into my research, however. I'm looking for a solution that's scalable and easy to use.

My advice to Cisco would be to simplify as much as possible so that a normal IT guy can understand the CCD and set it up. If they can simplify the manuals, navigation, and documentation, it would be nice. It will always be difficult for a beginner, however, to, rearrange or design the network.

I would rate the solution five out of ten.