Forescout Platform Reviews

We needed some protection in our environment. We use this product in some areas in our network to monitor the security of the endpoints of our users. 

The environment was easy to configure. 

The user management has been very easy for the most part.

The initial setup is pretty easy.

Technical support has been very helpful.

The stability overall is good.

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.

We may have some problems with compatibility - specifically with Cisco switches. We have the perimeter a Check Point firewall as an alarm for VPN connections. We have users integrating the VPN Check Point with Forescout. We can't seem to scale due to compatibility issues and price.

We have been working with the solution for around two years. It hasn't been that long. That said, we are moving away from the solution.

Overall, the stability of the product has been very good. It doesn't crash or freeze. There aren't bugs or glitches. It's been set up very well. We've found it to be reliable and the performance is good.

Our issue, in terms of scalability, is that we have a brittle machine. We struggled to get the licenses loaded. We would need to change the machine in order to develop a certain level of scalability capabilities.

At the moment, we have about 100 users on the solution, however, we require more licenses. Our goal was 1000 users on devices, however, it wasn't possible. The economics were against us.

While I have never personally opened a case with technical support in the past, my colleague has. He found them to be very responsive and helpful. He was satisfied with their level of service.

We did not previously use a different solution. Forescout was our first.

We are just now migrating to Cisco ISE. The problem is that we have around 500 users and we have only 100 licenses from Forescout due to the fact that it is a little expensive for us. We are trying instead to move to Cisco ISE, which has better pricing.

The initial setup was not complex. It was pretty easy. Installation maybe takes one or two days, and the implementation in total takes around two weeks.

We have a partner from Forescout in my country. He came to my company to meet with us. He helped explain a few things and assisted with network displays. 

There were about eight people that handled deployment between our end and the technical support side.

A Forescout representative ultimately came to our company for us. They assisted a little. They understood the cloud very well and were very helpful.

The licenses are quite expensive. Ultimately, we couldn't afford the amount we needed, and therefore we are moving off the product.

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 evaluated Cisco. The difference is the compatibility with our network. Other switches are Cisco devices, and therefore the compatibility and the integration were a little easier. With Forescout we have had some issues with some other access points. With Cisco ISE, we don't have that problem.

I do not recall which version of the solution we are using. We use the on-premises deployment model, however, we also have some clients on the cloud.

I would advise other organizations that, if they have multi-vendors in their network, use Forescout. However, if most of the devices are Cisco, it is best to use Cisco ISE.

It is a great tool and solution. We looked into it with the Magic Quadrant of Gartner and we have seen that it is a leader in the space. However, for us, it just doesn't work as well in terms of compatibility.

I'd recommend the solution. I would rate it at an eight out of ten.

To be able to improve security within our network. We needed Network Access Control (NAC). As such, we reviewed the available vendors who could provide this service to us and selected the Forescout CounterACT (CA) product primarily because we needed to be able to position the product in several regional locations. At the same time, we managed and controlled it locally and dynamically where we have it responding to a single control center. While we have implemented today strictly for wireless access, we will be extending that to include wired access in the future.

NAC: Forescout CounterACT has allowed us to better open our access and control wireless access globally from our HQ. This allows us to monitor the network access for every office globally. This has improved overall security, reducing risk and opening up the opportunity to provide greater end user flexibility. 

The key feature we use is AD integration. That feature needs the least amount of attention once set up. 

Monitoring and logging are the pieces that we use most day-to-day. These are used by both our network and security teams to ensure proper operation with minimal risk. Whether machines attempting access are firm managed, vendors visiting, or IoT, all are available within the CA appliance. We plan to extend the use to further support growth functionalities and new work from home initiatives going forward.

Better reporting and analysis of access (based on client) would be helpful. Also, a tool that allows tracing a user through the rules to authentication.

More detailed analysis during the authentication process, especially for troubleshooting access issues. We have found that troubleshooting RADIUS controls is quite arduous, as it is today. A trace function could easily resolve this by providing a means by which access issues from a certificate to passwords or accounts could easily be identified and remediated.

Two years.

ForeScout CA has proven itself to be very solid.

It is very scalable with a lot of features that we aren't even using yet today.

Technical support has been great. They are very knowledgeable, helpful, and considerate.

We used Cisco ISE but found that it did not have the flexibility that we needed within our organization.

Setup was anything but straightforward, but this had nothing to do with Forescout. This is the nature of NAC solutions in general. 

Setup takes significant preplanning. Don't expect to just drop it in, then have it up and running, even if you already use an alternative NAC product. However, it is worth it.

We used a Professional Services engagement from Forescout, but still experienced a lot of issues.

I don't know.

The fact that we were allowed to spin up as many servers as we had need of to support our geographic requirements while paying for licensing as an enterprise truly set Forescout apart from the crowd and improved the way we could design our access.

We had ISE. As that product reached EOL, we considered whether there were alternatives to a NAC that we should consider but felt that a NAC is a security requirement.

I am a freelance cybersecurity consultant. I provide and implement products for our clients.

Forescout Platform is a very good NAC solution.

It's a very good product.

The agentless visibility is definitely unmatched and outstanding. 

The actions that the agentless visibility, allow us to perform on the endpoint, are really amazing, especially in the way that it is done. 

It is a good solution, Garner rated because their leadership quadrant position is responsible for their market.

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.

At times, I am working on wireless and sometimes I enter a zone where there is no wireless connection, which forces a land connection. This is an issue that needs to be resolved because it consumes another license for the same device and the same user.

This issue has been escalated to Forscout directly.

There was integration with Microsoft SCCM previously, and have suddenly stopped the open integration module for Microsoft. Customers are not aware of what is available to them in terms of the open integration module. 

Forescout Platform advised that there are many options available and many things they can do, but they don't tell customers exactly what they are. 

They need clear documentation and direction as to what the customer can expect from the open integration module. Customers need some clarity on what they can do and what is not possible to do.

When it comes to a full open integration we need to rely on the professional services from Forescout directly, no one can implement it as there is a limited amount of knowledge available.

They need to be more considerate, and there should be good documentation available to the customer.

They need to improve their selling approach or the consultant approach.

One of their use cases is an ITM use case, and ITSS asset management, but they don't really do ITSS management. They only detect the ITSS and all the parameters around that test, but they do not have any integration with any database system where they can store all these details and act like a typical ITSS management system. 

They should remove that use case in full. They should say that we complement your ITSS management by detecting the unknown assets in your network. This would be right.

I have been familiar with the Forescout Platform for more than four years.

In terms of technical support, their engineering team is very rigid. They must provide us with some clear answers and if they exceed the time it takes to resolve the issue, they will charge for that extra time. For example, if they go one day more, they will charge for that extra day.

We have completed significant deployments which are more than 4,000 endpoints. There was a complex network architecture.

All of the implementations have gone very well and the customers are satisfied.

They base the license on the number of devices, which is quite misleading. If I am one user, it should be based on that rather than how many devices I use with the same user name. 

To base it on the number of devices it can reduce one more license from my overall license allotment. It can result in four or five licenses for one user.

I was a partner of the company who was a Forescout Platform partner and I was responsible for bringing in Forescout, and establishing the service line for the Forescout Platform sales, pre-sales, and the implementation, but I am no longer with that company.

I would rate Forescout Platform an eight out of ten.

We use the tool for security in the banking and insurance industry. 

I help customers use the Forescout Platform for compliance enforcement. We can specify what needs to be installed on devices connecting to the network, like antivirus, updates, and security software.

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.

I have been working with the product for two to three years. 

I help customers implement the product. Sometimes, it has difficulties, especially with internal networks. We can face challenges integrating with firewalls. Implementation usually takes 1-3 months with two people. The product needs maintenance after deployment.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. I usually recommend it to bigger companies, not smaller ones.

This solution ensures that every endpoint is compliant.

Forescout is easy to integrate with a lot of end systems.

It is very simple to set up.

We can scale the product.

It's stable.

Pre-sales is very helpful. 

The cost is too high. We are looking at some other solution where costs might be lower.

I've been using the solution for two to three months now. I've just joined the company.

The solution is stable. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. I'd rate the stability a five out of five. We have not had any issues aside from a configuration that was not done right.

While I haven't personally attempted to scale, it is my understanding that we are adding licenses and expanding it. Therefore, in all likelihood, it can scale. 

We have 800 users in total. All departments use it.

While I have spoken to pre-sales and found them helpful, I've never really dealt with technical support.

In other organizations, I've used Nevis and Cisco ISE.

Nevis is not very good as far as scalability is concerned. ISE is good. There are no issues with that. Forescout also should be good. There should not be any issues, and I do not expect any challenges.

The solution is straightforward to set up. It is not complex at all. 

We're currently working with a third party that is auditing the implementation process. I also need some help from Forescout to validate how the implementation is currently done here.

I wasn't part of the initial setup. However, my understanding is there was a third party involved. We just brought in a new third party, in fact. We're in the audit phase and working out some parameters. We're working to improve the integration aspect.

Since the costs continually go up with each new endpoint, we don't really see an ROI. However, we do see value in the product.

The solution is very expensive. 

The price is based on the number of endpoints and is an annual cost. For one license, we pay around 3,000 Indian rupees.

If you keep adding endpoints, the price keeps going up. Even if one user has three endpoints, you are paying for each endpoint, not per user. 

We are customers. 

I'm not sure of the version we are using. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's just a bit too expensive. Still, I would recommend it.

The most valuable features of the Forescout Platform are NAC for sharing, Network Access Control, and port sharing of the devices.

Forescout Platform could improve the vulnerability management as well as the control on the endpoint, which needs to be connected to my network.

In an upcoming release, they should add security features, such as malware and threat protection.

I have been using the Forescout Platform for approximately six years.

Forescout Platform was not a stable solution in 2015, but over the year it has become more and more stable. At this point in time, it is a stable solution.

The Forescout Platform is scalable.

The support from the Forescout Platform is great.

I rate the support from Forescout Platform a nine out of ten.

Positive

The price of the Forescout Platform is expensive. I purchased it for approximately 94 lakhs.

I rate Forescout Platform a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution was to control which of our devices were connected to the network. I'm a senior architect advisor. We were customers of Forescout. 

As a result of using Forescout, we had a better overview of all the devices, known and unknown, that were connected to our network; it was a real advantage.

A very valuable feature is the discovery mode. It covers all types of devices on the network, which we didn't know existed.

I don't think we tested the full potential of Forescout. We had some delay implementing it into our organization, due internal organizational issues and also due to a lack of device registrations. Meanwhile we decided to switch to a new network provider that doesn't have Forescout in its portfolio. We favour one-stop shopping for network and security services, and will migrate to Aruba ClearPass (portfolio). 

I used this solution for the past year. 

The solution is stable. 

The product seems to be scalable although we didn't fully test it. 

I think the initial setup was fairly straightforward although I was not involved on a technical level. We had the advantage that the technical engineers knew our networks and how to carry out the implementation and we also had some assistance from British Telecom. We initially focused on our main plant or main location, and then moved to our other locations, which are far smaller, and have a lower risk profile. That was our strategy and implementation took around nine months after the initial implementation which took about a week. At that point, we realized there were more devices than we thought and the process became more complicated. It took a while to get a handle on everything. There were just a couple of us involved in deployment. 

This product demonstrates the possibilities of network access control for the organization. As a pilot project, it changed the minds of people because they could see the potential which included enrolling policies so that all devices can connect to the network. People are more aware now of the security risks when there is no network access control.

Forescout is affordable in terms of the end goal, which is control. We only looked at it in terms of discovery modes and I think it's too expensive to use for that purpose alone. We took a package, managed by British Telecom, which gave us some additional services without additional costs. 

We evaluated a couple of options. We first planned to use Radius which is more of a Microsoft-ended solution. We also looked at Cisco ISE but that's very expensive and I've seen reviews on your site about the difficulty of implementation. 

I would recommend this solution because it has a lot of different ways of discovering different devices and showing networks. It's very flexible. I believe the reason we didn't reach our goal is because of our company decisions and not because of the solution. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

My company is in the financial services industry. The primary use case is Network Access Control and control endpoint access to network. The environment is used to process sensitive data. We want to ensure that rogue devices and unauthorized devices are unable to join the network. This will reduce our exposure to attacks.

It has helped with improving our security posture in terms of controlling the access of rogue devices into our network through identification. We have been able to prevent rogue device activities on the network, check the health of the system, and ensure remediation. 

It has provided visibility into the workings of our routers and switches. We also extended this capability to our branch offices through a WAN connection.

Access control: Being able to set policies that determine how devices join our network and how they are expected to behave while on the network. The fact that we are able to access the hygiene of our endpoint and monitor it continuously makes it fit for purpose.

I would advise Forescout through their research and development to look for features that they can add. Also, based on the what other competition may be selling, if they find any useful feature, they should add those to their product.

The last three months.

It is stable and reliable.

It is a good product that is fit for purpose.

Fantastic

No.

The initial setup is a bit complex.

Not applicable.

The setup cost, pricing, and licensing are on the high side.

No. I heard of Forescout, then went ahead and bought it.