Forescout Platform Reviews

We use the Forescout Platform for network access control and device management. The solution allows us to check the posture of our workstations to ensure they are compliant before granting them access to the network. We also use it to give people different privileges and access to our routers, switches, and firewalls based on their roles.

The solution's support is excellent. They are making an effort to attract more customers, which is reflected in their fast response times.

Forescout Platform has granular features and one of the most impressive features is the agentless feature. No agent installation is necessary for Forescout, which is amazing! It allows for agentless visibility into our network, even for Cisco devices that normally require the installation of AnyConnect.

Forescout Platform needs to improve how the device works in preventing rogue servers. Cisco has an impressive way of detecting rogue servers or rogue wireless access points to help protect the network. 

There is still room for improvement in this area with the Forescout GUI.

Integration with other products can be improved upon.

Fortinet and Cisco ISE have larger communities than the one available for Forescout Platform. The community size for the Forescout Platform can be improved. Forescout Platform doesn't have a big online community where people can go and ask questions and get solutions.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The technical support is great. They are trying to win the hearts of the customers by responding immediately to calls.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. Large infra may take few days to deploy.

The price of Forescout is reasonable when compared to Cisco ISE.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

We have around 50 people using the solution.

I would advise against investing in this solution for a small environment, as it is quite costly. For medium and enterprise-size environments, however, this is an option worth considering. The solution is much cheaper than Cisco ISE and Fortinet. 

The only community is still small.

Forescout Platform allows actions to be automated, which reduces the response time to any suspicious or malicious activity.

The best parts of Forescout Platform are its orchestration features, discovery capabilities, classification buckets, and flexibility in creating policies.

Forescout Platform sometimes returns false positives, so there's some fine-tuning to be done there. There are also some limitations with the Mac and Linux versions - the company claims they're agentless, but they're actually agent-based. In addition, there are a few actions that don't work in conjunction when we apply multiple actions, such as wanting to send a notification and isolate a device. In the next release, I would want to see better compatibility and visibility on the cloud front, and the system needs to keep up with upcoming technologies and trends.

I've been working with Forescout Platform for four years.

Forescout Platform is stable.

Forescout Platform is scalable.

The initial setup was very simple.

I would rate Forescout Platform's pricing as four out of five.

I would give Forescout Platform a rating of 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.

It's a Network Access Control tool.

The ability to control to identify devices and control the actual devices was great.

It is easy to set up.

It's stable and reliable.

The scalability is good. 

It is an affordable solution. 

The product is easily deployable and it is agentless.

Custom integrations need to be better. I'd like to have the option, for example, to integrate the Forescout Platform with a customized application or any other software out there that I am using at the same time.

I would like the Forescout Platform to be deployable on cloud solutions, like Huawei. It's not compatible with Huawei at the moment. It can be deployed only on Amazon and AWS.

I've been using the solution for five years now. 

It's very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable.

The solution can scale as necessary. You just pay more according to the number of users you are adding. 

We have about 70 users on the solution. 

We use it daily for our clients. 

The solution is very easy to set up. It's not overly complex or difficult.

I'd rate the solution a four out of five in terms of ease of setup.

The level of maintenance depends on the organization. If you are using more resources, you'll need more people. For an environment of maybe a thousand users, you can deploy one engineer. He can manage everything.

The cost of the solution is about 5000 South African rands per year for ten users. That's about $320 USD. If you want to increase usage, you can easily scale, you just pay more. 

I'd rate the solution four out of ten in terms of affordability. 

We are users and a reseller. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

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.

It provides us with visibility into what's connected to our network, such as contractors, mobile devices, and whether they're a part of our corporate asset list or not.

We use it to prevent malicious activities on our network that potentially infiltrate it. We've been able to take out over twenty percent of our threats connected into our environment that we just never had a means to stop from connecting up to our network.

We've discovered regular assets. Let's say you had a mobile device, you walked into our network, and you said "hey, I need to connect up to the network. I'm a contractor here for you all and I'm going to add in one device". You immediately now have access into our environment.

It needs easier integration to other partners that automate functions within the security phase. There's no difference because you're not going to be able to fill the places fast enough for all these security people. So how do you get it to be able to manage more with less people by automating some of the functions? So when, for instance, NetScout discovers something and installs a ticketing system instead of sending an alert to a person, it automatically opens a ticket with the appropriate levels and automates that stuff.

We've had no issues with deployment.

It has been stable. The benefit wasn't around stability, it was more around preventing instability. What we were fearful about is whether or not customers would get impacted by the restriction of them not being able to connect to the network.

For instance: you're an employee, your laptop was part of our asset, but your phone was not and your tablet was not. All of the sudden, now all three of those devices were all connected into environment. Well, I only want your laptop to be connected. Your mobile devices, I really don't care to because when you go, you surf wherever you want on your stuff. You could probably pull up malware and then plug it in as soon as you put in your credentials into our network. So we want to keep that one off and allow you to connect to the network but connect to the internet, but not to my infrastructure.

We haven't scaled it all the way up, but we started to pilot, grew it to a couple of floors, and then grew it to an entire building.

I've never had to use it.

My understanding is that it was complex simply because my mandate is to zero-in back to the user.

We did look at multiple partners and we ended up with ForeScout.

Definitely use it. It's a good protection tool.

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.

We're Forescout partners and offer this as a solution to our clients.

The solution's most valuable aspects are its network visibility and its ability to extend into other solutions for integration purposes. 

The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up.

The solution needs more definitive pricing. The costs are hard to nail down.

I've been using the solution for less than two years. It's been one and a half years at this point. It hasn't been too long.

The solution is stable. It's very reliable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash.

The solution is scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out, they are able to fairly easily.

We tend to use this solution for different sized companies in various markets.

Technical support is great. We find them to be quite knowledgeable and responsive. We're very satisfied with the level of support we receive.

The initial setup is not complex at all. It's straightforward. It's pretty easy to manage.

We implement and deploy the solution for our clients.

The pricing is very important in Sri Lanka. We're sensitive to pricing. We'd like it if the solution was more clear on their pricing and if they were able to lower it.

We try to always use the latest version of the solution.

We're a partner. We use various deployment models, depending on the company we are implementing the solution for. We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. We've been quite pleased with the solution so far.

The customers seem to be very happy with the product as a whole. It's just the pricing that worries everyone. There's the competition to consider. If others can offer better pricing, I believe we would probably consider deploying it instead.

That said, overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.