Forescout Platform Reviews

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.

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 use the Forescout Platform for network access control and device management. The solution allows us to check the posture of our workstations to ensure they are compliant before granting them access to the network. We also use it to give people different privileges and access to our routers, switches, and firewalls based on their roles.

The solution's support is excellent. They are making an effort to attract more customers, which is reflected in their fast response times.

Forescout Platform has granular features and one of the most impressive features is the agentless feature. No agent installation is necessary for Forescout, which is amazing! It allows for agentless visibility into our network, even for Cisco devices that normally require the installation of AnyConnect.

Forescout Platform needs to improve how the device works in preventing rogue servers. Cisco has an impressive way of detecting rogue servers or rogue wireless access points to help protect the network. 

There is still room for improvement in this area with the Forescout GUI.

Integration with other products can be improved upon.

Fortinet and Cisco ISE have larger communities than the one available for Forescout Platform. The community size for the Forescout Platform can be improved. Forescout Platform doesn't have a big online community where people can go and ask questions and get solutions.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The technical support is great. They are trying to win the hearts of the customers by responding immediately to calls.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. Large infra may take few days to deploy.

The price of Forescout is reasonable when compared to Cisco ISE.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

We have around 50 people using the solution.

I would advise against investing in this solution for a small environment, as it is quite costly. For medium and enterprise-size environments, however, this is an option worth considering. The solution is much cheaper than Cisco ISE and Fortinet. 

The only community is still small.

Our primary use cases of Forescout Platform are network access control, user access control, and Wi-Fi network access control.

The most valuable feature of Forescout Platform is that it has everything that Aruba has at significantly less cost.

Unfortunately, Forescout Platform can only be accessed by Android systems. iOS is not supported, so there are some limitations to the operating system. I would like to see all devices have access to the solution.

Forescout needs to upgrade its development in the future.

I have been using Forescout Platform for the last two years.

Forescout Platform is very stable.

The solution is scalable. It is not one box that has limitations on licenses. Forescout Platform is more capable than Aruba ClearPass. 

Customer service and support is a four out of five overall. I am satisfied with the support I receive. 

Positive

Comparing Forescout to Aruba ClearPass, the difference is in the price and the level of policy enforcement.

The initial setup of Forescout Platform is very easy because it is pre-configured. I would rate it a five of five for the ease of setup of this product.

Forescout Platform licenses include everything integrated into the system including eyesight, recovery, and valid license. All three come in one box. It is a very competitive product, being half the price of its competitors.

5,000 user licenses will cost you between seven and eight million dollars, compared to 20 million for Aruba.

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

This solution ensures that every endpoint is compliant.

Forescout is easy to integrate with a lot of end systems.

It is very simple to set up.

We can scale the product.

It's stable.

Pre-sales is very helpful. 

The cost is too high. We are looking at some other solution where costs might be lower.

I've been using the solution for two to three months now. I've just joined the company.

The solution is stable. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. I'd rate the stability a five out of five. We have not had any issues aside from a configuration that was not done right.

While I haven't personally attempted to scale, it is my understanding that we are adding licenses and expanding it. Therefore, in all likelihood, it can scale. 

We have 800 users in total. All departments use it.

While I have spoken to pre-sales and found them helpful, I've never really dealt with technical support.

In other organizations, I've used Nevis and Cisco ISE.

Nevis is not very good as far as scalability is concerned. ISE is good. There are no issues with that. Forescout also should be good. There should not be any issues, and I do not expect any challenges.

The solution is straightforward to set up. It is not complex at all. 

We're currently working with a third party that is auditing the implementation process. I also need some help from Forescout to validate how the implementation is currently done here.

I wasn't part of the initial setup. However, my understanding is there was a third party involved. We just brought in a new third party, in fact. We're in the audit phase and working out some parameters. We're working to improve the integration aspect.

Since the costs continually go up with each new endpoint, we don't really see an ROI. However, we do see value in the product.

The solution is very expensive. 

The price is based on the number of endpoints and is an annual cost. For one license, we pay around 3,000 Indian rupees.

If you keep adding endpoints, the price keeps going up. Even if one user has three endpoints, you are paying for each endpoint, not per user. 

We are customers. 

I'm not sure of the version we are using. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's just a bit too expensive. Still, I would recommend it.

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.

I had to gain visibility across my network and be able to block any unknown device connected to my network and this is what I use Forescout Platform for.

The most valuable features of the Forescout Platform are ease of management and outstanding visibility. The visibility is simple to obtain.

Forescout Platform could improve the costs of integrations.

I have been using the Forescout Platform for one year.

The stability of the Forescout Platform is good.

Forescout Platform can scale very easily. You can deploy as many servers as you want, and it's highly scalable. There is console to manage all the Forescout servers which make for easy scalability. 

Forescout Platform is used by only the network and security administrators. There is a total of 10 people using it.

Forescout Platform is very simple to deploy. We did the deployment within a few hours, and I gained visibility at the end of the day. I had visibility across my whole network.

Forescout Platform does not require a lot of maintenance. It is a low-maintenance platform.

We need to pay for integration for each integration that we want to do and there is an additional license fee. This adds more costs. It is not something that anyone can afford. If you want to integrate this with a lot of other tools, it can be costly.

The initial cost of the Forescout Platform was $200,000 for three years. There are only additional costs for upgrades.

My advice to others is to use the Forescout professional services. They are offering a fixed price to deploy the solution, and it's major pain relief as you are talking with experts committed to achieving your objectives.

I rate Forescout Platform a ten out of ten.

We are using the Forescout Platform for controlling the access to the network for devices.

Forescout Platform could improve the integration or compatibility with other solutions, such as Chinese-made and other market solutions. They do not have any integration with H3C,  RUCKUS Switching, Lenovo, CommScope, IBM Switching etc. which are network/Communication Brands. They do not have integration with new solutions in the market. They do integrate well with Brocade, Cisco, Juniper, and quite a few more but they could expand the integration. 

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

Forescout Platform is stable, it is great.

The stability of the Forescout Platform is good.

I had an issue with the license at the beginning but the support fixed the situation promptly the same day.

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

There are two main solutions in the market, Cisco ISE, and Forescout Platform. If we compare both of them, the Forescout Platform is best. The solution is top of the line. If someone wants to choose a NAC solution, I will definitely recommend it.

We needed this solution for our organization, it was essential. We have received a return on investment.

Cisco ISE

I would recommend this solution to others, it is the best in the market at this time.

I rate Forescout Platform a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution was to control which of our devices were connected to the network. I'm a senior architect advisor. We were customers of Forescout. 

As a result of using Forescout, we had a better overview of all the devices, known and unknown, that were connected to our network; it was a real advantage.

A very valuable feature is the discovery mode. It covers all types of devices on the network, which we didn't know existed.

I don't think we tested the full potential of Forescout. We had some delay implementing it into our organization, due internal organizational issues and also due to a lack of device registrations. Meanwhile we decided to switch to a new network provider that doesn't have Forescout in its portfolio. We favour one-stop shopping for network and security services, and will migrate to Aruba ClearPass (portfolio). 

I used this solution for the past year. 

The solution is stable. 

The product seems to be scalable although we didn't fully test it. 

I think the initial setup was fairly straightforward although I was not involved on a technical level. We had the advantage that the technical engineers knew our networks and how to carry out the implementation and we also had some assistance from British Telecom. We initially focused on our main plant or main location, and then moved to our other locations, which are far smaller, and have a lower risk profile. That was our strategy and implementation took around nine months after the initial implementation which took about a week. At that point, we realized there were more devices than we thought and the process became more complicated. It took a while to get a handle on everything. There were just a couple of us involved in deployment. 

This product demonstrates the possibilities of network access control for the organization. As a pilot project, it changed the minds of people because they could see the potential which included enrolling policies so that all devices can connect to the network. People are more aware now of the security risks when there is no network access control.

Forescout is affordable in terms of the end goal, which is control. We only looked at it in terms of discovery modes and I think it's too expensive to use for that purpose alone. We took a package, managed by British Telecom, which gave us some additional services without additional costs. 

We evaluated a couple of options. We first planned to use Radius which is more of a Microsoft-ended solution. We also looked at Cisco ISE but that's very expensive and I've seen reviews on your site about the difficulty of implementation. 

I would recommend this solution because it has a lot of different ways of discovering different devices and showing networks. It's very flexible. I believe the reason we didn't reach our goal is because of our company decisions and not because of the solution. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Forescout Platform can be deployed on the cloud or on-premise.

When we have a large enterprise environment with a lot of users, different security policies are to be applied in certain situations and locations. This is where the Forescout Platform is used. If we have some compliance requirements to have the NAC solution in place, we prefer the Forescout Platform over other solutions.

Two things can be improved in the Forescout Platform. First of all, the support for some certain proprietary protocols from other vendors, but they are very widely used. If the TechEx from Cisco, was added to Forescout, then it will be a full solution for me. 

Forescout Platform can be much improved. The support for certain proprietary protocols from other vendors, but they are very widely used. If I can go a little bit technical here, I would say the TechEx from Cisco, if added to Forescout, then it will be a full solution for me. Additionally, the Forescout Platform can have better integration with other solutions, such as Cisco NFG firewalls. They need to integrate seamlessly.

I have been using the Forescout Platform for four years.

The stability is amazing for the Forescout Platform. We have been using Forescout for four years, and no one complained about the stability.

The scalability of the Forescout Platformall depends on the license. For example, if you have a certain amount of users, endpoints, and anything else you need to put under governance. If you scale out to a higher number, all you need to do is increase the license.

We have five customers and a total endpoints users of approximately 15,000.

The support from the vendor we have received was good.

The initial setup is straightforward. We had to implement the solution in a short timeframe and we managed to do it in one month as a managed service.

Forescout Platform is easy to deploy. It's the fastest NAC solution that you can deploy in a large environment. There is the opportunity to improve as you go. It can be the first deployment, and you can improve as you go without any big disturbance to the environment. It's very flexible when it comes to implementing a certain security policy. You can have very complex security policies for the Forescout Platform. It makes the deployment much easier than others.

The deployment for the Forescout Platform takes two to three engineers. However, it depends on the size of the environment. The integration or the co-operation should happen with a lot of other teams. The main deployment team for the solution is from two to three persons.

We have a very clear licensing model for business. I don't have to have a Ph.D. to be able to understand the licensing model as you might need for other solutions. If I know exactly what we want, it can tell you which license you need. The solution is easy for purchasing, ordering, and ease of deployment as well.

As a managed service provider and system integrator, we are on an annual licensing model.

I highly recommend Forescout Platform, unless, there is a need to integrate with any Cisco TechEx environment. For other use cases, it should be the first choice as a NAC solution. It should come as the first option, with one exception only, if the environment has a lot of Cisco devices. The Forescout Platform does not support authentication to Cisco devices. There is a lack of some protocols on the box itself.

I rate Forescout Platforma nine out of ten.