Cisco ISE vs FortiAuthenticator: What are the differences?

Introduction

Cisco ISE and FortiAuthenticator are both network authentication solutions that offer similar functionality in terms of providing secure access to network resources. However, there are key differences between the two platforms that set them apart from each other. This markdown document will highlight and compare these differences in a concise manner.

1. Scalability: Cisco ISE has superior scalability compared to FortiAuthenticator. While both platforms can handle a large number of users, Cisco ISE is specifically designed for enterprise-level deployments, making it the preferred choice for organizations with extensive network infrastructures and a high number of users. FortiAuthenticator, on the other hand, is better suited for small to mid-sized enterprises with less complex network environments.

2. Supported Authentication Protocols: Cisco ISE supports a wide range of authentication protocols, including RADIUS, TACACS+, LDAP, Active Directory, and OAuth. This extensive protocol support ensures compatibility with different network equipment and allows for seamless integration with existing authentication systems. FortiAuthenticator, on the other hand, offers support for the most commonly used authentication protocols such as RADIUS and LDAP, but may have limitations when it comes to integrating with certain third-party systems.

3. Network Access Control (NAC) Features: Cisco ISE offers a comprehensive set of Network Access Control (NAC) features that provide granular control over network access. These include the ability to define and enforce policies based on user roles, device types, and contextual information. FortiAuthenticator also offers NAC capabilities, but it may not provide the same level of granularity and flexibility in policy enforcement as Cisco ISE.

4. Integration with Network Equipment: Cisco ISE is specifically designed to integrate seamlessly with a wide range of network equipment from Cisco and other vendors. This allows for centralized management and enforcement of network access policies across the entire infrastructure. FortiAuthenticator, on the other hand, may have limitations in terms of its ability to integrate with certain network equipment, especially those from vendors other than Fortinet.

5. Reporting and Analytics: Cisco ISE provides robust reporting and analytics capabilities, allowing administrators to gain insights into network access patterns, security events, and compliance status. This comprehensive visibility helps in identifying potential security risks and making informed decisions. FortiAuthenticator also provides reporting and analytics features, but they may not be as extensive or customizable as those offered by Cisco ISE.

6. Vendor Support and Ecosystem: Cisco ISE benefits from strong vendor support and a well-established ecosystem of third-party integrations. This ensures that the platform is regularly updated with new features, security patches, and compatibility enhancements. FortiAuthenticator also has vendor support, but it may not have the same level of third-party integration options and ecosystem as Cisco ISE.

In Summary, Cisco ISE offers superior scalability, extensive protocol support, advanced NAC features, seamless integration with network equipment, robust reporting and analytics, and strong vendor support. FortiAuthenticator, on the other hand, is better suited for smaller deployments, may have limitations in protocol support and integration options, provides less granular NAC capabilities, and may not offer the same level of reporting and analytics features.