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 (3rd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (15th)
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 October 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 stability is amazing for the Forescout Platform. We have been using Forescout for four years, and no one complained about the stability."
"The most valuable feature is the blocking of USB devices."
"When users don't have the required updates, security patches, and antivirus, the tool blocks them from our network."
"The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up."
"Obtaining visibility into the network and connected devices is very simple with this tool. It takes me three minutes to do a base deployment when all the parameters are available."
"The most valuable features of ForeScout is the fact that it can do network access control either with 802.1x or without 802.1x."
"The platform enables automated policy enforcement, allowing us to simulate and test policies before enforcement, streamlining our security operations."
"Provides a good overview of all devices on a network."
"It is very easy to scale the product."
 

Cons

"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."
"As a user, if I am using a laptop that is Wi-Fi connected, Forescout identifies my port connectivity as one user license, and if I take that same laptop with the same username to a wired network, which is also the same network that is used for the Wi-Fi connection, Forescout detects it as a separate license."
"The system controls could be better."
"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."
"I believe that the overall user experience has not always been preferable."
"The technical support could be improved in terms of response time and first-level support quality."
"For the user, the policy that they have implemented sometimes needs adjustments. Sometimes the features that the customer asks for aren't involved in the main installation, and I need to bolt an add-on in. However, I never know if this policy is the right one when I do this."
"It does not support the TACACS+ protocol."
"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We paid between $20,000 and $25,000 for a three-year license with maintenance."
"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."
"Devices with multiple IP's count multiple times against your license count."
"We might have paid in the ballpark of $20,000 yearly for our licenses. I do not recall there being other fees over and above the standard licensing fee."
"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 price of the Forescout Platform is expensive. I purchased it for approximately 94 lakhs."
"There are no additional costs that I am aware of."
"For one license, we pay around 3,000 Indian rupees."
"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.
872,019 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
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: October 2025.
872,019 professionals have used our research since 2012.