Forescout Platform Reviews

We have two main use cases: wired networks and wireless networks. In the wireless scenario, our main focus is on authenticating users to ensure compliance before granting access to our private network.

We use the Forescout Platform for device visibility and control in our network. It's very helpful for tracking malicious or unusual activity. We use it to track which ports are open, which machines are running specific services, and to identify vulnerabilities. For example, there was a vulnerability related to SMB, and we could use the product to determine which machines inside our organization were allowing SMB traffic.

The tool's most valuable feature is its ease of configuring and controlling endpoints, particularly in building policies for endpoint management. Its interface is simple to use and offers good visibility.

When compared with other solutions, the Forescout Platform's standout feature is its ability to integrate with various systems. This capability is particularly valuable as it supports the implementation of a zero-trust architecture. We are currently in the process of constructing our zero-trust architecture, wherein the tool serves as a pivotal component.

The solution's compliance capabilities have indeed been very beneficial for our organization. Unlike other solutions, it allows us to implement controls swiftly. Typically, transitioning to a blocking mode with other solutions would take around six months. However, we achieved this with the Forescout Platform within just one month.

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.

Forescout Platform's support often takes a long time to respond to tickets. Even after we reply, there's another lengthy wait for feedback, and their responses sometimes seem to delay resolution with unnecessary questions. For instance, they might ask for details about previous issues. Meanwhile, competitors may offer temporary solutions but often lack or are unsatisfactory regarding technical or research and development support from Forescout Platform's team.

Another area where it can improve is when dealing with multiple sites and overlapping subnets. While it works well for individual sites, it struggles when managing several sites with overlapping subnets, especially with authentication portals.

I think the Forescout Platform could use some extra features or improvements in the future. Specifically, it could be better at working with other security tools. For example, when it connects with VPNs or security scanners, it could work a bit better. The tool has already made some efforts in this area, but I think it could do even more to make these devices work together

I have been working with the product for two years. 

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has 800 to 1000 endpoints and approximately 500 users. I rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. Forescout Platform is fully operational in our company, managing all our devices. We plan to use it more in the future because we're setting up a zero-trust architecture. This will allow our staff to work remotely, even from home.

I have used Cisco before. When deciding which product to switch to, we picked the Forescout Platform because it was more stable and easier to upgrade.

I rate the tool's ease of deployment a ten out of ten. It is easy to manage and implement. With the help of our partner, it took about one to two weeks at most to deploy this solution. This includes setting up the policies, implementing them, and ensuring the product is operational. Building the policies initially took around two to five days. However, refining and enhancing the policies took approximately three weeks in total.

We required a team of one senior engineer and one regular engineer to deploy this solution. The regular engineer was primarily responsible for implementing the Forescout Platform. In contrast, the senior engineer was involved in specific areas, such as integration and troubleshooting issues during deployment.

We currently only need one engineer for maintenance. The solution is mostly up and running, requiring minimal intervention. On average, the engineer spends about five minutes daily checking for issues or addressing complaints.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

The product is used especially in scenarios where you have an abandoned server that did not have any updates or any security updates or a stable operating system, owing to which you had to shut it down in your environment. If, somehow, somebody tries to switch on an abandoned server, Forescout will check if the operating system and antivirus are updated or not, and if they are not, then it will immediately disconnect such a server from the network and isolate it.

The valuable feature of the product stems from the fact that it is easy to implement. The person who implemented the tool had a security team and a department that took care of the implementation and defined the policies along with everything else. For patching purposes, my company uses Ivanti Endpoint Management Software.

I have been using Forescout Platform for a year. I use the solution's latest version.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight and a half to nine out of ten. I provide my ratings based on my experiences associated with the product. There is another team in my company that takes care of the configuration and implementation process attached to the product. I have not even seen the interface of the product except for a few of its features, including how its policies are made.

It may be a scalable solution, but I don't know much about it.

I believe that my company has implemented the tool for around 8,000 to 9,000 users.

The implementation of the tool was taken care of by the security team and not me.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on an on-premises model.

The product may not yield any return on investment since it is only used to make your environment more reliable and secure.

Considering that my company is learning and implementing new things, the tool's UI and UX are okay.

I recommend the tool to others. I don't know what the competitive products of Forescout Platform are, but in our environment, they are the best.

The tool's policy enforcement capabilities are good and streamlined to our company's security operation.

I don't think there is any AI feature in Forescout Platform.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use the Forescout Platform primarily for asset management.

The federal government's continuous diagnostics and mitigation programs are the focus of the current project I'm working on. 

It's one of the tools that has given the federal government visibility into network devices and everything.

The most common complaint I hear about Forescout is about their technical support.

Some sort of highly scalable platform, such as a private cloud, that can be distributed across a network quickly and grow rapidly, would be beneficial.

I believe that the overall user experience has not always been preferable.

I have been working with Forescout Platform since 2018.

I haven't had enough direct experience with the current project to know, but I know the federal government has a variety of various stages of Forescout deployment, but I believe it's just different versions of the CounterACTs appliances and such.

It has a place in terms of stability. I believe Forescout is likely to compete with other NAC tools used by agencies, such as Cisco ISE and new EDR tools that are entering the market. I believe, will be considered. But, overall, the asset management, is effective.

In terms of our deployment, it's basically just buying more CounterACT appliances whenever we need to scale up. It can be done, but it's not scalable in the way that a cloud deployment is, it's somewhere in the middle.

We have a large number of users, in our organization. 

It has been implemented in a large number of federal agencies, including the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and the Treasury. It's quite large.

I believe that the current state should be maintained. I don't believe there are any major plans to increase our usage. Maybe just upgrades or future license upgrades, or something like that.

Technical support needs improvement. They are not very responsive to existing customers.

My interactions with them have been satisfactory, but I've heard from federal agencies that they had difficulties because they brought it to us.

When we arrived, Forescout was still in the process of being deployed. I don't believe they had the kind of capability that Forescout provides prior to our arrival. If anything, they had different NAC tools.

Because of the way it is deployed, the initial setup was complex.

I would rate the initial setup a three out of five.

It took a long time to complete. It's a massive deployment, depending on the agency, it could take at least six months to get it up and running and collect the data we require. Some of it is still ongoing.

To my knowledge, Forescout did the majority of the deployment.

We are Forescout Platform integrators, consultants, and partners.

Most agencies, I believe, have NAC engineers who manage it, and they most likely have training skillsets for it. I would say that most shops require two to three, three to four people to maintain.

In terms of ROI, I've never seen any data.

I don't have pricing information.

There are no additional costs that I am aware of.

They evaluated other solutions before choosing the Forescout Platform.

Before you begin deploying it, I would suggest that you define how you intend to use it. Just have an end state in mind so that you can build towards it and ensure you have all the functions you need for the design in place. Whatever you want to do with the data that comes out of it, try to define it first.

I would rate Forescout Platform a six out of ten.

We use the solution for network admission control. It manages the admission of endpoints to the networks.

Firstly, I like the stability. Secondly, the ease of deployment— it's not complex. Thirdly, there's a great support team that becomes actively engaged whenever we encounter issues. Their technical support is amazing. Fourthly, good documentation is available. We have detailed information about the product.

For sales purposes, the product has limitations. It does not support the TACACS+ protocol. This creates a need for another product to work with.

I have been using this solution for the past two and a half years.

The product is stable. Once you deploy it, you don't need to touch it again.

The solution is highly scalable. I currently use it for corporate use within my company and for other clients. We have three to four engineers for deployment and maintenance tasks.

We have rarely contacted customer service and support, as the website is straightforward.

The initial setup was straightforward and not complex. The deployment process took six weeks. It's shorter than the typical six months for similar products.

The deployment process involves an initial assessment, checking the security policy against the required tasks, preparing the network for deployment, and then the deployment itself.

I recommend using the solution because it gives verified control over the environment. It has a great visibility feature. Also, it gives visibility on what's happening on the network. Proceed with the prerequisites, particularly the initial assessment. It has to be conducted properly. Otherwise, the solution might not follow a straightforward path.

The first step is the initial assessment, followed by the second step of collecting clear requirements. Clarity in requirements is crucial because the solution can be directed in any direction you tell it to go. Therefore, you need to know exactly what you need to do. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We're a financial institution with about 30,000 users. 

Forescout has a feature that blocks the endpoint at the point of collection. It sets preconditions and will block the system if those aren't met. 

Forescout needs to improve its cloud management and remote connectivity.

We have been using Forescout since 2018.

Forescout's scalability isn't robust or straighforward enough. You need to plan ahead and purchase the correct appliance before scaling up. You will be limited if you buy a smaller plan. 

You often need in-person support, so Forescout should invest more in training its customers. Customers need to be confident that they can service the solution themselves because it's often hard to get a technician to show up on-site. 

We also use FortiClient, depending on the use case. Both solutions are good.

Deploying Forescout is complex and takes about four hours. You have to configure the devices before you can send packets. If you miss any of those devices, the application endpoint security will be compromised  In other solutions, you don't need to start the configuration before you can access the network advice. It pushes a policy based on the outcome of the process.  

The price could be reduced. During COVID, many offices switched to remote work, but you still need to pay the same cost to renew the license even though workers are connecting remotely through one VPN.

I rate Forescout Platform six out of 10.

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.

We use the Forescout Platform to manage all of the devices connected to our network.

The interface is easy to use.

The 802.1X configuration, which is difficult for all switches, is not required. It makes it easier to work with switches and IoT devices.

Forescout Platform is too expensive, so the price should be reduced.

Although Forescout manages endpoints and network devices, there is no capability for user management. This is something that should be added. For example, if I find that something is wrong in the services and need to disable a user's access, there should be no need to go to Active Directory and disable the user there. As it is now, computers and devices can be disabled, but not users.

I have been using Forescout for one year and am preparing to get my certificate.

This is a stable solution.

The Forescout Platform is easy to scale. We have more than 200,000 endpoints and at least 150,000 users.

I am working in the Security Operations team, which does not contact Forescout technical support directly. They are not responsible for the types of problems we have, such as checking for computer compliance and installing a new computer.

The complexity of the initial setup depends on the environment. I am managing an enterprise environment, so any deployment or any implementation will not be easy. Generally, however, Forescout is not difficult to configure.

This is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use of the Forescout Platform is to enhance network security. It is deployed in an on-premises environment, although there is interest in exploring cloud-based solutions.

Automated policy enforcement is particularly valuable as it significantly reduces the need for manual intervention, thus enhancing efficiency and security.

Customer support could be improved by providing direct assistance from Forescout employees or specialists at customer sites to enhance the support experience and effectiveness.

The scalability also needs some enhancement.

I have been working with the Forescout Platform for two years.

Forescout Platform's stability is rated at eight out of ten.

Presently, there are twenty five engineer architect using the solution. I would rate the scalability a six out of ten. 

The customer service could be improved, specifically regarding direct support presence.

Neutral

The setup process is straightforward.

Forescout's pricing is noted for its attractiveness, with potential discounts depending on partnership levels.

The comparison with Nozomi suggests a switch due to Forescout's more appealing pricing strategy.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.