Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Forescout Platform vs Palo Alto Networks IoT Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Forescout Platform
Ranking in IoT Security
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Compliance (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (16th)
Palo Alto Networks IoT Secu...
Ranking in IoT Security
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the IoT Security category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 16.5%, down from 19.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks IoT Security is 7.7%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IoT Security
 

Featured Reviews

Odai Halawani - PeerSpot reviewer
May 27, 2024
It's an easy and effective solution, especially for device profiling without agents
Forescout Platform works as our next-gen solution, helping us monitor and manage devices connected or disconnected from the network. Additionally, it assists in remediating noncompliant devices Forescout Platform's most valuable aspect is its excellent device profiling for devices without agents,…
Anil Redekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Dec 27, 2021
Good high throughput and low latency with a great Sp3 Engine
In our organization, we use the product "PA 3220" for Security and NAT policy configuration to block unwanted traffic. We can create different zones in our network, such as trusted, untrusted, DMZ. advance threat protection, and anti-malware protection.  We can create site-to-site and remote site…

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 802.1X compliance authentication feature of this solution is very good."
"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."
"You can quickly filter your view of devices and zero in on the ones you want using a variety of tools, such as what subnet it is on or what it has been classified as."
"Provides a good overview of all devices on a network."
"Being able to actively identify the client without a certificate allows you to control every device on your network regardless of the make, model, and software running. This allows for end-to-end security."
"The initial setup is easy, taking no more than two or three weeks."
"The interface is easy to use."
"It is simple to use. We just need to enable features and then configure IoT policies."
"Single-pass traffic processing enables very high throughput and low latency."
"The key strength of Palo Alto firewalls lies in their application-based approach, offering a much finer level of control compared to traditional firewalls."
"I like the Cortex Data Lake integration with security automation."
"From a security standpoint, it provides a comprehensive range of standard security features that align with our requirements."
"I like the threat information, and we can share the logging data with Cortex Data Lake."
"This solution has been most valuable for establishing a VPN and implementing allow/deny rules. It has also enabled us to create security policies. It is an easy solution to customise when it comes to creating templates and pulling reports."
 

Cons

"The product needs to improve its support. I know a case that dragged on for about one and a half years. They eventually suggested professional services and closed the ticket. We followed their advice, engaging the account manager and professional service team, only to discover that the issue was a bug. After reopening the case, it's been about six months, and the problem still hasn't been resolved."
"The solution should include integration with other firewalls."
"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."
"Better integration with third-party vendors is needed because as it is now, the list of third-party solutions that we can integrate and automate is quite limited."
"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."
"The solution's customer support is bad and should be improved."
"Custom integrations need to be better."
"It does not support the TACACS+ protocol."
"It would be beneficial to have a more centralized and user-friendly platform that could consolidate all the necessary information, which proved challenging during the initial POC phase."
"There can be more automation in terms of security and detection. It is already good."
"The cost is still high and licensing is still complex."
"While not overly complex, its usability could be enhanced, making it a more intuitive experience for everyone."
"Essentially, this solution focuses on data analysis and cannot perform any physical actions."
"More application signatures are required."
"The reporting for this solution could be improved. The logs we receive are only saved for one week. We would like to have the database timeframe increased to a month or two for historical reporting as well as increased storage capabilities to support this data and reporting."
 

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 Forescout Platform's pricing is in the middle range, not too cheap or expensive."
"It might not be the cheapest solution, but you get what you pay for."
"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."
"The solution is not priced low. There are no hidden costs."
"The setup cost, pricing, and licensing are on the high side."
"Devices with multiple IP's count multiple times against your license count."
"They base the license on the number of devices, which is quite misleading."
"While Palo Alto Networks IoT Security might cost more than some competitors, its features and effectiveness justify the price tag."
"The pricing for Palo Alto Networks IoT Security is a bit high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IoT Security solutions are best for your needs.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
32%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Legal Firm
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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...
What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks IoT Security?
From a security standpoint, it provides a comprehensive range of standard security features that align with our requirements.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks IoT Security?
The primary problems are firewalls unable to reach the cloud or port issues between the Cortex Data Lake and the IoT servers. If these issues occur, IoT data collection will fail. If IoT data colle...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks IoT Security?
We use Palo Alto Networks IoT Security. The on-premises firewalls send logs to the customer's Cortex Data Lake. The IoT solution collects these Cortex Data Lake logs to suggest security policies fo...
 

Also Known As

Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NHS Sussex, SAP, SEGA, Vistaprint, Miami Children's Hospital, Pioneer Investments, New York Law School, OmnicomGroup, Meritrust
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Forescout Platform vs. Palo Alto Networks IoT Security and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.