Magic Quadrant for Network Access Control. Share this on Archived Published: 08 December ID: G Already have a Gartner account?. With a strong presence in San Francisco and a place in Gartner’s “Magic Quadrant for Network Access Control (NAC) “1, German software. MAGIC Suburban Mobility Transit Study–April – Town of Bedford. MAGIC Suburban Mobility Transit Study–April – Town of Bedford · townofhudson.
|Published (Last):||4 April 2017|
|PDF File Size:||13.36 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.96 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
As an example, this user writes in his review of ForeScout CounterACT, “The most valuable features of ForeScout is the fact that it can do network access control either with Many network devices are not ready to do Lawrence OransJohn Pescatore.
Network access quavrant NAC technology providers fall into three major categories: Wired and wireless network infrastructure vendors: Because they already sell products that serve as enforcement points in the network, NAC products augment their primary offerings. NAC continues to evolve, and vendors focused on NAC offerings as their primary products have been the quickest to recognize and react to the dynamic market.
The mobility and bring your own device BYOD trends have increased demand, and the largest NAC suppliers have seen strong increases in growth. Although we expect the growth of NAC-involved endpoints to continue to grow rapidly, over the longer term, NAC functionality will become embedded in wireless access methods, which will provide downward pressure on pricing.
Magic Quadrant for Network Access Control. To be included in this Magic Quadrant, a vendor’s solution must be able to enforce NAC policies in a mzgic infrastructure environment. Also, vendors’ solutions must include the policy, baseline and access control elements of NAC, as defined by the following criteria: The NAC solution must quadrajt a dedicated policy management server with a management interface for defining and administering security configuration requirements and for specifying the access control actions for example, allow or quarantine for compliant and noncompliant endpoints.
Because policy administration and reporting functions are key areas of NAC innovation and differentiation, vendors must own the core policy function to be included in this Magic Quadrant. A baseline determines the security state of an endpoint that is attempting a network connection, so that a decision can be made about the level garfner access that will be allowed.
Magic Quadrant for Network Access Control 2011
It must include the ability to assess policy compliance for example, the presence of an MDM agent for mobile devices or disk encryption for Windows PCs.
Various technologies may be used for the baseline function, including agentless solutions such as vulnerability assessment scansdissolvable agents and persistent agents. NAC solutions must include a baseline function, but “reinventing the wheel” is not necessary.
Baseline functionality may be obtained via an OEM or licensing partnership. The NAC solution must include the ability to block, quarantine or grant partial limited access or full access to an endpoint. The solution must be flexible enough to enforce access control in a multivendor network infrastructure, and it must be able to enforce access in wired LAN, WLAN and remote access environments. Enforcement must be accomplished via the network infrastructure for example, Vendors that rely solely on agent-based endpoint self-enforcement do not qualify as NAC solutions.
Network infrastructure vendors must have demonstrated their ability in and to sell NAC solutions beyond their installed base of infrastructure customers.
IT Management: Magic Quadrant for Network Access Control
NAC vendors must consistently target and show wins at gartned with 5, endpoints and above to be included. This Magic Quadrant does not analyze solutions that target the small or midsize business market. Vendors must have an installed base of at least customers or aggregate endpoint coverage ofendpoints. 2011 that do not directly generate revenue for the vendor, such as those that embed basic NAC functionality in other products at no extra charge, have been excluded from this analysis.
The NAC solutions had to be generally available as of 1 November Microsoft no longer actively markets its NAP solution, and we received few questions from Gartner clients about it. If your organization faces BYOD challenges, consider solutions that can easily profile personally owned mobile devices, and apply controls that are consistent with your organization’s mobile device policies.
Because there are multiple approaches for enforcing NAC policies for example, virtual LANs, firewalls, access control lists and otherslook for solutions that best fit your network infrastructure.
Demand for NAC functionality increased indriven largely by the need for enterprises to support the use of personally owned smartphones and tablets.
NAC’s ability to detect what type of device is connecting to the network and apply limited access capability when required is a core component of limiting risk, while meeting the demand for “any device I want to use.
Solutions that can integrate with a wide range of EPP and MDM solutions, as well as offer dissolvable agents or agentless endpoint assessments, have strong advantages in the NAC market today and will have strong advantages in the future. There are also some trends that will impact NAC over the next few years: Growth in the adoption of virtualized desktop infrastructure reduces the importance of device access to the network, because the applications and data remain on the server.
Publier les commentaires Atom. Market Responsiveness and Track Record.