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)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (3rd), Endpoint Compliance (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (15th)
Impulse Point SafeConnect
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 11.8%, down from 13.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Impulse Point SafeConnect is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Forescout Platform11.8%
Impulse Point SafeConnect0.5%
Other87.7%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Odai Halawani - PeerSpot reviewer
It's an easy and effective solution, especially for device profiling without agents
Forescout Platform's most valuable aspect is its excellent device profiling for devices without agents, which is crucial for our work due to challenges with agent-based devices. Its isolation and blocking actions are particularly effective for network security. The device compliance feature helps us ensure device compliance through immediate actions like updating antivirus software. We have already integrated Forescout with antivirus and vulnerability assessment tools, allowing it to monitor vulnerability scores and automatically isolate devices if critical vulnerabilities are detected.
CD
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

"The most valuable features are remote access and administration scripts."
"The stability is amazing for the Forescout Platform. We have been using Forescout for four years, and no one complained about the stability."
"The standout strength of this solution lies in its unique capability to effectively manage unmanaged switches."
"I have noticed that in the last year the license model has changed from licensing the whole appliance to licensing the number of devices. It's more simple for a large installation, or a user to have CounterACT as their peripheral site in the company. It's a good choice to have changed the license policy."
"This solution can be used to organize guest portals, integrate switches, and create policies. Some of its standard use cases also include completing key process upgrades and anti-virus of Windows OS."
"The most valuable features of the Forescout Platform are NAC for sharing, Network Access Control, and port sharing of the devices."
"It allows for good detection of all the vendor products we have on-site."
"The most valuable feature of Forescout Platform is that it has everything that Aruba has at significantly less cost."
"It is very easy to scale the product."
 

Cons

"Multitenancy should be included in the next version so it could be used as a managed service provider."
"Forescout Platform could improve the vulnerability management as well as the control on the endpoint, which needs to be connected to my network."
"The fact that Forescout Platform doesn't have a presence in the South African region is a weakness because of which you can't ask for help from them if you have any problems."
"We have found that the agent-based authentication, available within this solution could be improved."
"They should improve features related to IT security. ForeScout should analyze behavior to see if the behavior is malicious behavior and block this device. They should develop the ability to analyze the behavior of the device in my environment."
"The solution could always improve by adding more features to make it more robust."
"The solution should include integration with other firewalls."
"The licensing costs are quite high. With the amount of hardware we have, we need too many licenses to make the product effective and it's ultimately just too costly."
"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's about $160,000, but I'm not sure how long that is for or what it includes. Because we were a test base, we were provided with servers, but now, Forescout wants us to buy servers because those servers are now end-of-life or end-of-service. For our lifecycle management program, in order to get a refresh on those servers, we would have to buy servers or use our own network resources to house Forescout. Forescout takes up about 13 or 14 virtual CPUs."
"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 Forescout is reasonable when compared to Cisco ISE."
"Licenses are perpetual but can come with renewable support."
"I would rate Forescout Platform's pricing as four out of five."
"Time savings in finding rogue devices as well as identifying potentially unwanted devices on the network has saved the organization time and money."
"We paid between $20,000 and $25,000 for a three-year license with maintenance."
"You can have a flexible license depending on your environment."
"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.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise43
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 Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: August 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.