No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Forescout Platform vs macmon Network Access Control comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

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)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (5th), Endpoint Compliance (3rd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (29th)
macmon Network Access Control
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 7.7%, down from 11.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of macmon Network Access Control is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Forescout Platform7.7%
macmon Network Access Control2.6%
Other89.7%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

AshishKumar Rai - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Comprehensive visibility has strengthened endpoint control and automated threat response across networks
When it comes to improving Forescout Platform, I have faced some issues recently, particularly with the switch integration part. When integrating a switch, it asks for the vendor type, and often it does not match. For example, one series of HP switches may not be found in that vendor list. This leads to frustration because you have to check again with different HP models, and once you integrate a switch, you cannot edit the vendor list without removing it. Other issues are being worked on, particularly related to switch integration. I believe they will be fixed in the next upgrade or patch fix. There are no major issues, but the configuration changes needed for the switch model are necessary, and I think it would help if during integration, an admin user could check the password or credential used, as they currently cannot see the password after it is entered and saved.
SA
Wireless Network Engineer at Forvia
The product is stable and easily connects with clients, but it is not scalable and does not provide deeper troubleshooting
There is no information on the protocol where the clients stop to authenticate. There are some policies, but I don't know whether the device stopped on the authentication or authorization levels. I don't know whether it is getting the right certificate. I have to work on assumptions. If I want to go to the history to see what happened to a client the previous day or two days ago, it will be very hard because the server is used by multiple devices. For every device and user, macmon creates a file into the RADIUS appliance for deep troubleshooting. To troubleshoot, it creates a bunch of files. If I want to check what happened in the history, I have to check all the files. In some cases, there are 100 files. It is impossible for me to go to each file to see where it happens. It will be good to find the file my client authenticated based on the MAC address. Otherwise, the product must have one file for a specific date. I don't have any problem in terms of dates because it's normal. However, having hundreds of files per day is very hard to troubleshoot. The solution must allow users to filter files based on dates. It must provide deeper troubleshooting and reduced log. Also, the RADIUS logs are very huge.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The platform enables automated policy enforcement, allowing us to simulate and test policies before enforcement, streamlining our security operations."
"ForeScout CounterACT is like a Pandora's box, which contains a lot of functionalities that can be used to improve the customer's daily operation tasks and reduces manual workforce."
"The interface is easy to use."
"This is clearly the best product for the NAC use cases in this field for Forescout."
"Primarily used to define which host to admit onto the network, by tying a policy to the MAC address."
"Ease of deployment There's a great support team that becomes actively engaged whenever we encounter issues. Their technical support is amazing. Good documentation is available. The product is stable. The solution is highly scalable. I recommend using the solution because it gives verified control over the environment. It has a great visibility feature."
"The most important feature is that this solution works well without a 802.1x feature, and you can use CounterACT to implement that feature and also have a very granular control of your devices, including shadow devices."
"The support from the Forescout Platform is great."
"When we started with macmon we had immediate success, we could see our network and see the devices and could easily go online."
"We use it with our Cisco switches so we can see which switch it is actually connected to."
"The ease of connecting with the client is valuable for me."
"The API is a great way to get information from other tools."
 

Cons

"The solution could always improve by adding more features to make it more robust."
"Regarding pricing, there is room for improvement to enhance competitiveness with other vendors and solutions."
"Forescout Platform could improve the integration or compatibility with other solutions, such as Chinese-made solutions. They do not have any integration with S33 which is a switch. They do not have good integration with new solutions in the market. They do integrate well with Rocket, Cisco, Juniper, and quite a few more but they could expand the integration."
"Search - needs boolean functionality (or pseudo operand now working)."
"It needs enhanced mobile support, but I have heard that this is coming."
"The biggest negative regarding Forescout is their support."
"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 technical support could be improved in terms of response time and first-level support quality."
"The single sign-on process can be improved and the interface should be made more user-friendly."
"The solution must allow users to filter files based on dates."
"The service macmon offers is already great."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Forescout's pricing is noted for its attractiveness, with potential discounts depending on partnership levels."
"We paid between $20,000 and $25,000 for a three-year license with maintenance."
"The price of the Forescout Platform is expensive. I purchased it for approximately 94 lakhs."
"For one license, we pay around 3,000 Indian rupees."
"Licenses are perpetual but can come with renewable support."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
914,889 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise45
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
macmon NAC
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RWJ Barnabas HealthEnbridge EnergyToyota MotorsSt. Luke's University Health NetworkGlobal Credit Union
More than 1,500 installations in all over Europe in all industries: Stepchange, Volkswagen, Vivantes Healthcare, MBDA Weapons, APS engineering, Alfred Ritter GmbH (Ritter Sport), Haßberg-Kliniken, 1. FSV Mainz 05 eV., Siempelkamp, AEB etc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Forescout Platform vs. macmon Network Access Control and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,889 professionals have used our research since 2012.