Forescout Platform Reviews

We use the solution for network access. 

The Forescout Platform's most valuable features include its agentless configuration, which allows for easy integration with switches, and its broad customizability of rules and conditions for policy configuration. By leveraging its Network Access Control capabilities, the tool controls network access, allowing administrators to enforce policies tailored to the organization's needs. 

The tool is agentless. If it encounters any issues or undergoes shutdown, it doesn't disrupt the entire network.

Forescout Platform would benefit from using AI. Everything has to be set up manually, but AI can learn and suggest rules over time. It also lacks visualization, and some interface configurations need improvement. The visualization seems a couple of years behind compared to other products.

Therefore, visualization and interface components need enhancement. A few pages can be improved for better design compatibility with current standards compared to other products available today. The solution doesn't have a widget-based dashboard. Also, the visualization isn't as customized as Splunk's analyzer. I believe it could incorporate a similar design approach into its dashboard.

I have been using the product for six months. 

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. 

I haven't contacted the tool's support yet.

I've had experience setting up the Forescout Platform along with other products like Splunk. In my opinion, the Forescout Platform is the easiest to set up. The main configuration task is enabling the spam switch on the network. Configuring policies can be complex, but that's more related to management than the Forescout platform. I rate its ease of deployment an eight out of ten. 

The installation itself takes no more than a day. However, depending on how quickly customers can define their desired policies, the full deployment process can take up to three months.

The tool's pricing is expensive but reasonable.

We have only done POC, and it hasn't progressed to production. Our customers are small and medium businesses, mostly from the banking domain. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

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.

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. 

I use the Forescout Platform for different customers from the enterprise, banking, and telecom sectors.

The solution's implementation and operation are very easy. The solution's GUI is very user-friendly. It doesn't have a lot of components. It has only one device or a few devices connected to one management with only one agent.

The solution's customer support is bad and should be improved. When our customers try to reach or discuss with the support team, they don't even answer.

I have been using Forescout Platform for two years.

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

I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s initial setup is very easy.

Overall, I rate Forescout Platform an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for network admission control. It manages the admission of endpoints to the networks.

Firstly, I like the stability. Secondly, the ease of deployment— it's not complex. Thirdly, there's a great support team that becomes actively engaged whenever we encounter issues. Their technical support is amazing. Fourthly, good documentation is available. We have detailed information about the product.

For sales purposes, the product has limitations. It does not support the TACACS+ protocol. This creates a need for another product to work with.

I have been using this solution for the past two and a half years.

The product is stable. Once you deploy it, you don't need to touch it again.

The solution is highly scalable. I currently use it for corporate use within my company and for other clients. We have three to four engineers for deployment and maintenance tasks.

We have rarely contacted customer service and support, as the website is straightforward.

The initial setup was straightforward and not complex. The deployment process took six weeks. It's shorter than the typical six months for similar products.

The deployment process involves an initial assessment, checking the security policy against the required tasks, preparing the network for deployment, and then the deployment itself.

I recommend using the solution because it gives verified control over the environment. It has a great visibility feature. Also, it gives visibility on what's happening on the network. Proceed with the prerequisites, particularly the initial assessment. It has to be conducted properly. Otherwise, the solution might not follow a straightforward path.

The first step is the initial assessment, followed by the second step of collecting clear requirements. Clarity in requirements is crucial because the solution can be directed in any direction you tell it to go. Therefore, you need to know exactly what you need to do. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

It enhances cybersecurity by allowing us to monitor and manage all connected devices on our network.

The standout strength of this solution lies in its unique capability to effectively manage unmanaged switches. In addition to its comprehensive feature set, it focuses on AAA for enhanced security and network control.

Incorporating additional features such as NetFlow DLP, would serve as valuable add-ons. Regarding pricing, there is room for improvement to enhance competitiveness with other vendors and solutions.

I have been working with it for seven months.

I would rate its stability capabilities nine out of ten.

Scaling it poses no challenges or obstacles. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The deployment time varies based on the customer's network and its complexity. It could range from as little as five to seven days to one or two months, depending on factors such as the number of switches involved. I oversee a maintenance team comprising over 35 skilled individuals dedicated to network and security solutions. Our technical staff is well-rounded, with three experts specializing in Mac solutions, while others are adept in various network features such as routing and firewall management.

The pricing structure should be enhanced.

Overall, I would rate it nine 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.

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.

I use Forescout Platform in the construction industry to monitor connections to our cloud for ERP and file services.

Forescout Platform has made it possible to block people working near our construction sites who should not have access to our network.

Forescout Platform's best feature is asset management.

Forescout Platform isn't flexible with connections to devices like printers and forces you to re-enter details like the MAC address after any breakdowns.

I've been using Forescout Platform for about half a year.

Forescout Platform is stable.

Forescout Platform is scalable.

I previously used Portnox and ISE.

Forescout Platform is very complex to implement because it has a lot of features, and all of them need to be configured.

We used a third-party team.

Forescout Platform isn't cheap, but it's the best solution for the environment I'm dealing with. We paid between $20,000 and $25,000 for a three-year license with maintenance.

I evaluated FortiNAC, and Forescout Platform is more robust and advanced.

I'd give Forescout Platform a rating of nine out of ten.

Mostly, I use this solution for endpoint compliance, antivirus updates to block malicious traffic access to the internal network, and for visibility, to see who is connected to the network and the infrastructure.

I can integrate Forescout with products from multiple vendors in my environment, and also, the integration is searchable. It can be used with 802.1X and non-802.1X to integrate with my existing network. I don't need to upgrade any existing networks in my system, and I don't need to replace existing devices to integrate with Forescout. I find value in not having to spend money upgrading existing devices and networks.

Other solutions have TACACS+, but Forescout does not. In the next release, I would like to see Forescout have accounting.

I've been working with this solution for around two years.

The scalability varies. If you have 1000 endpoints, Forescout recommends the 2000 endpoint plan. Depending on the scalability you choose, the hardware and license can be extended.

We currently have three people who use this solution, including an
IT security person, an administrator, and a technical person.

For technical support, they have ActiveCare Basic, ActiveCare Advanced, and ActiveCare Premium. Mostly, I have used ActiveCare Advanced for technical support requests, and they have responded depending on the severity and also my support plan.

With regard to initial setup, it can take a bit to customize policies. Forescout requires in-depth knowledge to customize policies to monitor endpoint visibility.

It takes around one or two hours to deploy the software and have it up and running. This includes configuration and integration with the existing network. Customization takes a long time because some departments require more customization.

I had a consultant do the deployment, and it could have been better.

You can have a flexible license depending on your environment.

If you are looking for a NAC solution and you want to integrate the existing network infrastructure without upgrades or without replacing existing devices, then you should go with Forescout. Also, if you don't want to run an agent in the endpoint, Forescout is the way to go because it does not require an agent. It is optional. If you are concerned about having to run too many agents in your endpoint and don't want to add an another agent, this solution is a good choice.

Because Forescout has flexible integration and flexible pricing, I would give it a general rating of nine out of ten.