Cisco Identity Services Engine vs Pulse Secure: What are the differences?

Introduction

The Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) and Pulse Secure are both security solutions designed to enhance network access control, but they differ in several key aspects.

1. Architecture: Cisco ISE is a comprehensive network access control platform that integrates with other Cisco security products, providing a centralized approach to security policy enforcement. Pulse Secure, on the other hand, focuses more on secure access to applications and resources through its Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) architecture.

2. Functionality: Cisco ISE offers a wide range of functionalities, including network access policy enforcement, guest access management, and threat containment. It integrates with other security solutions like Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFW) and Advanced Malware Protection (AMP). Pulse Secure primarily focuses on VPN access and securing application-level traffic by providing granular access control and secure remote access.

3. Ease of Integration: Cisco ISE is specifically designed to integrate with other Cisco security products seamlessly. It provides a unified interface for managing and enforcing security policies across the network. Pulse Secure, while it can integrate with various third-party security technologies, may require additional configuration and custom integration to achieve the same level of integration as Cisco ISE.

4. Scalability: Cisco ISE is known for its scalability, allowing organizations to scale their network access control policies to support thousands of users, devices, and endpoints. Pulse Secure can also handle a large number of concurrent connections, but its scalability may not be as robust as Cisco ISE in terms of managing security policies on a massive scale.

5. Deployment Options: Cisco ISE can be deployed as an on-premises solution, allowing organizations complete control over their security policies and data. It can also be deployed in a virtualized form factor for more flexibility. Pulse Secure offers both on-premises deployment options and cloud-native deployment models, giving organizations the choice to adopt either depending on their requirements.

6. Pricing: The pricing models of Cisco ISE and Pulse Secure may vary. Cisco ISE typically involves a higher upfront cost due to its comprehensive feature set and integration capabilities. Pulse Secure, being a more focused solution, may offer more flexible pricing options, especially for organizations primarily looking for secure remote access capabilities.

In summary, Cisco ISE offers a comprehensive network access control solution with robust integration capabilities, while Pulse Secure focuses more on secure remote access and application-level traffic. Cisco ISE provides scalability, ease of integration with other Cisco security products, and offers both on-premises and virtualized deployment options. Pulse Secure, although it can integrate with other third-party security technologies, may not provide the same level of scalability and might be more suitable for organizations looking for secure remote access solutions.