Forescout Platform Reviews

I am using the Forescout Platform for access control, a central management dashboard of all endpoints, and blocking.

The most valuable feature of the Forescout Platform it's highly customizable and flexible.

If older network devices are used there can be some compatibility issues while using the Forescout Platform. Additionally, if the switches that are deployed in your infrastructure are not captured properly to the endpoints there might be some difficulties with Forescout Platform trying to monitor the network traffic. Traffic management is an area the vendor should work on.

I have been using the Forescout Platform for approximately four years.

I rate the stability of the Forescout Platform a seven out of ten.

We have security engineers and support workers using the solution.

I rate the scalability of the Forescout Platform a seven out of ten.

I rate the support of the Forescout Platform a seven out of ten.

Positive

The time frame for the implementation can vary depending on what needs to be configured. It is important to have support from the vendor for the setup, it is not easy.

We used assistance support for the implementation of the solution.

The solution is not priced low. There are no hidden costs.

I rate the price of the Forescout Platform a seven out of ten.

One support person is enough for the maintenance of the solution if everything was set up correctly.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate the initial setup of the Forescout Platform an eight out of ten.

We use the tool for security in the banking and insurance industry. 

I help customers use the Forescout Platform for compliance enforcement. We can specify what needs to be installed on devices connecting to the network, like antivirus, updates, and security software.

For improvements, I think technical support could be enhanced. The time zone difference makes remote support difficult - I'm in Indonesia, and they're in the US. Maybe the Forescout Platform could provide engineers from Asia Pacific.

I have been working with the product for two to three years. 

I help customers implement the product. Sometimes, it has difficulties, especially with internal networks. We can face challenges integrating with firewalls. Implementation usually takes 1-3 months with two people. The product needs maintenance after deployment.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. I usually recommend it to bigger companies, not smaller ones.

Our primary use of the Forescout Platform is to enhance network security. It is deployed in an on-premises environment, although there is interest in exploring cloud-based solutions.

Automated policy enforcement is particularly valuable as it significantly reduces the need for manual intervention, thus enhancing efficiency and security.

Customer support could be improved by providing direct assistance from Forescout employees or specialists at customer sites to enhance the support experience and effectiveness.

The scalability also needs some enhancement.

I have been working with the Forescout Platform for two years.

Forescout Platform's stability is rated at eight out of ten.

Presently, there are twenty five engineer architect using the solution. I would rate the scalability a six out of ten. 

The customer service could be improved, specifically regarding direct support presence.

Neutral

The setup process is straightforward.

Forescout's pricing is noted for its attractiveness, with potential discounts depending on partnership levels.

The comparison with Nozomi suggests a switch due to Forescout's more appealing pricing strategy.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use the Forescout Platform for radius authentication, as well as visibility control and enforcement. Such as discovery, classification, control, and orchestration for all possible use cases.

This is clearly the best product for the NAC use cases in this field for Forescout. It is difficult to implement. I wouldn't say it's complicated in that sense. It all depends on who is using it. 

If people don't understand the product, it's obviously complicated because it has multiple components that are difficult to mix and match and bring into the environment, which we faced a couple of years ago. But now that we know how the products and different licensing models work, we can bring in the right components, such as modules and all. It's kind of like once you know the product is simple.  Otherwise, you must understand that this is somewhat complicated.

The product is excellent. As a product, there is nothing to complain about. However, they should improve their overall support.

Let me provide an example. Assume you are in the United Kingdom, and you are also familiar with the cars in your neighborhood, and any manufacturer you have heard of. And let's say Forescout is one of the niche products, similar to Rolls-Royce. You know that Rolls-Royce is good, but you need some kind of information accessibility to use that.

The comfort is good, and you can obviously drive it, but you need to understand all of the features. You need that level of knowledge, that level of information is clearly not available.

First and foremost, that information is not accessible. 

The second point to mention is that once you purchase the later support and services. That is, they will continue to charge you for every service.

Things they should have told you ahead of time are that if you run into problems during the deployment, they will keep asking you to engage the product's professional services, which they will charge you for.

And from the standpoint of support, they should be adaptable. When they are aware that customers have made significant investments in these expensive licenses. And it is expected that they will receive adequate assistance. That is where they are falling short.

You own a Rolls-Royce, but you are having trouble making the most of its features and functions.

I have been working with Forescout Platform for five or six years.

I am working with the latest version.

Forescout Platform is a stable solution.

If you do it correctly in terms of configuration and deployment. If you know the necessary prerequisites, yes it is very stable.

The Forescout Platform is scalable.

We are using it, and we have currently rolled out this solution to 55% of our organization.

We have approximately 400,000 users.

We also use Cisco ISE. I am working with the latest version which is version 3.1.

It is expensive and there are extra costs for the support.

The price depends on your environment. We do get a discount.

It is expensive because you have to pay for their CSM, the customer's access manager, and their professional services on top of that, and they charge you roughly $400 per hour, which is overhead. I find it to be expensive.

It is purely based on the use case. If they have any issues with OT or IoT, this is the best solution. Otherwise, they can rely on other products if they are a typical non-manufacturing or non-healthcare organization.

ISE is also extremely expensive. They can look for anything cheaper than this. It is dependent on the use cases.

Because IoT and OT products are widely used in healthcare and manufacturing, and Forescout is the best.

I would rate Forescout Platform an eight out of ten. They mostly fail to provide support during and after deployment.

I primarily use Forescout Platform for its wireless functionality, predictive functionality, and NetFlow feature.

Forescout Platform's best feature is plug-in integration.

Forescout Platform's technical support needs to be improved - it could be faster, and its team could be more knowledgeable.

I've been using Forescout Platform for five or six years.

There are some problems with Forescout Platform's stability, but compared to its competitors, it performs well.

There are no problems with Forescout Platform's scalability.

Forescout Platform's technical support is slow to respond and could be more knowledgeable.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward.

Forescout Platform is on the expensive side.

I would recommend Forescout Platform for smaller businesses but not for large ones. I would give Forescout Platform a rating of seven out of ten.

We're a financial institution with about 30,000 users. 

Forescout has a feature that blocks the endpoint at the point of collection. It sets preconditions and will block the system if those aren't met. 

Forescout needs to improve its cloud management and remote connectivity.

We have been using Forescout since 2018.

Forescout's scalability isn't robust or straighforward enough. You need to plan ahead and purchase the correct appliance before scaling up. You will be limited if you buy a smaller plan. 

You often need in-person support, so Forescout should invest more in training its customers. Customers need to be confident that they can service the solution themselves because it's often hard to get a technician to show up on-site. 

We also use FortiClient, depending on the use case. Both solutions are good.

Deploying Forescout is complex and takes about four hours. You have to configure the devices before you can send packets. If you miss any of those devices, the application endpoint security will be compromised  In other solutions, you don't need to start the configuration before you can access the network advice. It pushes a policy based on the outcome of the process.  

The price could be reduced. During COVID, many offices switched to remote work, but you still need to pay the same cost to renew the license even though workers are connecting remotely through one VPN.

I rate Forescout Platform six out of 10.

We use the Forescout Platform primarily for asset management.

The federal government's continuous diagnostics and mitigation programs are the focus of the current project I'm working on. 

It's one of the tools that has given the federal government visibility into network devices and everything.

The most common complaint I hear about Forescout is about their technical support.

Some sort of highly scalable platform, such as a private cloud, that can be distributed across a network quickly and grow rapidly, would be beneficial.

I believe that the overall user experience has not always been preferable.

I have been working with Forescout Platform since 2018.

I haven't had enough direct experience with the current project to know, but I know the federal government has a variety of various stages of Forescout deployment, but I believe it's just different versions of the CounterACTs appliances and such.

It has a place in terms of stability. I believe Forescout is likely to compete with other NAC tools used by agencies, such as Cisco ISE and new EDR tools that are entering the market. I believe, will be considered. But, overall, the asset management, is effective.

In terms of our deployment, it's basically just buying more CounterACT appliances whenever we need to scale up. It can be done, but it's not scalable in the way that a cloud deployment is, it's somewhere in the middle.

We have a large number of users, in our organization. 

It has been implemented in a large number of federal agencies, including the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and the Treasury. It's quite large.

I believe that the current state should be maintained. I don't believe there are any major plans to increase our usage. Maybe just upgrades or future license upgrades, or something like that.

Technical support needs improvement. They are not very responsive to existing customers.

My interactions with them have been satisfactory, but I've heard from federal agencies that they had difficulties because they brought it to us.

When we arrived, Forescout was still in the process of being deployed. I don't believe they had the kind of capability that Forescout provides prior to our arrival. If anything, they had different NAC tools.

Because of the way it is deployed, the initial setup was complex.

I would rate the initial setup a three out of five.

It took a long time to complete. It's a massive deployment, depending on the agency, it could take at least six months to get it up and running and collect the data we require. Some of it is still ongoing.

To my knowledge, Forescout did the majority of the deployment.

We are Forescout Platform integrators, consultants, and partners.

Most agencies, I believe, have NAC engineers who manage it, and they most likely have training skillsets for it. I would say that most shops require two to three, three to four people to maintain.

In terms of ROI, I've never seen any data.

I don't have pricing information.

There are no additional costs that I am aware of.

They evaluated other solutions before choosing the Forescout Platform.

Before you begin deploying it, I would suggest that you define how you intend to use it. Just have an end state in mind so that you can build towards it and ensure you have all the functions you need for the design in place. Whatever you want to do with the data that comes out of it, try to define it first.

I would rate Forescout Platform a six out of ten.

Forescout Platform's most valuable features are that it is very granular. We are able to cull out a lot of information about our particular device or endpoint. The configuration and the visibility are very seamless. Overall the solution is very easy to handle and it's very comprehensive.

We have visibility of all the hidden assets and there are various versions of implementations of an AV in our environment. From the Forescout Platform, we have clarity of the device, and all the different versions reported in a simple dashboard. The number of attacks has been minimal. After this installation, we didn't have any kind of noticeable incident.

I have been using the Forescout Platform for approximately one year.

The solution is very stable.

Forescout Platform is scalable.

We have approximately 4,000 people using the solution in my organization.

We have used the support and it has been good. However, sometimes we have missed them because of the timezone difference.

I rate the support from Forescout Platform a four out of five.

We have previously used Symantec Mac. We switched to the Forescout Platform because Symantec has certain inhibitions. Symantec doesn't have an agentless implementation and they don't have a roadmap.

I have done many POCs with many similar solutions, such as Aruba ClearPass and Cisco ISE.

The implementation of Aruba ClearPass was very difficult. When we tried other solutions, the initial learning is difficult and takes a lot of time. Forescout Platform has been straightforward to use.

Cisco ISE has a very difficult integration for us.

Initially, the implementation of the Forescout Platform took some time to figure out. The reason is we are a manufacturing unit and we have certain silos that are insulated areas where certain systems will not connect to the internet or to the LAN. Since there are many parts of it, we have to have an inclusive view of all those systems. It took a while for us to initially implement, but after a few months, everything worked well.

We have a help desk team for support of this solution. We have a few security people to handle it.  We don't require that much of people for maintenance.

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.

My advice to others is Forescout Platform is a good solution. It's fairly simple to deploy in an environment, far better than the other products in which we have done a POC, has good stability and performance. 

I highly recommend it.

I rate Forescout Platform a ten out of ten.