Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Forescout Platform vs Impulse Point SafeConnect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Forescout Platform
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (4th), Endpoint Compliance (3rd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (18th)
Impulse Point SafeConnect
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 10.3%, down from 13.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Impulse Point SafeConnect is 1.2%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Forescout Platform10.3%
Impulse Point SafeConnect1.2%
Other88.5%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

AshishKumar Rai - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Comprehensive visibility has strengthened endpoint control and automated threat response across networks
When it comes to improving Forescout Platform, I have faced some issues recently, particularly with the switch integration part. When integrating a switch, it asks for the vendor type, and often it does not match. For example, one series of HP switches may not be found in that vendor list. This leads to frustration because you have to check again with different HP models, and once you integrate a switch, you cannot edit the vendor list without removing it. Other issues are being worked on, particularly related to switch integration. I believe they will be fixed in the next upgrade or patch fix. There are no major issues, but the configuration changes needed for the switch model are necessary, and I think it would help if during integration, an admin user could check the password or credential used, as they currently cannot see the password after it is entered and saved.
CD
Director of Computer Information Services at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Easy to scale, enforces policies well, and has responsive technical support
A lot of campuses use SafeConnect. It gives us good visibility and enforces policies. It helps enforce network security by scanning devices, making sure they have current and valid antivirus solutions with up-to-date antivirus definitions, and steers our end users by enforcing policy groups and steering them to the right access. Technical support is responsive. The stability is pretty good. It is very easy to scale the product.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We think it's simple. We think it's very useful and we really like reports and everything."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"Vulnerability remediation is valuable. We can narrow down a system and its properties. We can go granular on the properties of each endpoint, such as which operating system you're using."
"We use the Forescout Platform for device visibility and control in our network. It's very helpful for tracking malicious or unusual activity. We use it to track which ports are open, which machines are running specific services, and to identify vulnerabilities. For example, there was a vulnerability related to SMB, and we could use the product to determine which machines inside our organization were allowing SMB traffic."
"This is clearly the best product for the NAC use cases in this field for Forescout."
"The user management has been very easy for the most part."
"The most valuable feature for us is the real-time alerting of newly connected devices, whether they are approved or unapproved devices on our network."
"The visibility is the main benefit. We now know how many devices are connected, what the use for each device is and what kind of devices we have in our environment."
"It is very easy to scale the product."
 

Cons

"Customer support could be improved by providing direct assistance from Forescout employees or specialists at customer sites to enhance the support experience and effectiveness."
"It does not support the TACACS+ protocol."
"It's scalable, but not without a big investment. It doesn't do so well at the branch. At the home office, it does okay and not so well at the branch."
"The technical support could be improved in terms of response time and first-level support quality."
"It needs enhanced mobile support, but I have heard that this is coming."
"There were many issues with deployment, but these were largely due to our own network architecture issues."
"Other solutions have TACACS+, but Forescout does not. In the next release, I would like to see Forescout have accounting."
"Multitenancy should be included in the next version so it could be used as a managed service provider."
"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They base the license on the number of devices, which is quite misleading."
"We went with the virtual appliance option. The biggest cost to running these types of appliances would be to either have multiple virtual appliances at every data center or running Remote SPAN hardware to provide you the real-time network visibility."
"The cost of licensing for this product is quite high, but this cost covers all the features of the solution so it is a single payment for the term that has been selected."
"The price of the solution is reasonable. We have paid for the license for five years. We have integration with Symantec AV for orchestration, and we have an additional license."
"We paid between $20,000 and $25,000 for a three-year license with maintenance."
"Devices with multiple IP's count multiple times against your license count."
"Forescout is more expensive than Cisco because Cisco gives high discounts."
"The price of Forescout is reasonable when compared to Cisco ISE."
"For our tier group, for one year, the cost is probably around $10,000 for the license. If you do multi-year, you could get two years, and you could get it for about $8,000 per year. If you do three years, you get it around $7,000 a year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise44
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
Forescout is a very powerful NAC product that does not rely on port level configuration. It can detect and block unauthorized devices very quickly. But it has a lot of capabilities and really would...
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I would rate the Forescout Device and Visibility Control Platform at a six out of ten.
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I recommend doing a compression demo. If people use it, they will buy it. So they have to see the product in place. That's the main recommendation is to do a proof of concept. If they do, they will...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
SafeConnect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NHS Sussex, SAP, SEGA, Vistaprint, Miami Children's Hospital, Pioneer Investments, New York Law School, OmnicomGroup, Meritrust
Aerohive Solution
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: February 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.