We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Cisco is a worldwide, well-known, trusted, and respected branded product, and despite its known complexities, Cisco ISE pushes just ahead of Forescout Platform. Forescout Platform has just a few buggy issues and is lacking in some reporting structure, which makes Cisco ISE an easier choice.
"We have seen ROI. It has done its job. It has protected us when we needed it to."
"It does what it's supposed to. We use a certificate-based authentication method for corporate-managed devices. That means when a user walks in with their managed laptop and plugs it into the network, it chats with Cisco ISE in the background, allows it on the network, and away they go."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for each access request, no matter the source. It's also very effective at helping with the distributed network and at securing access."
"I love the policy sets, they are really nice and dynamic."
"The core point is that Cisco ISE is the same globally compared to FortiAuthenticator. Whether I deploy in China, the US, South Africa, or wherever, I'm can get all the capabilities. It allows me to directly integrate with 365, and from a communications point of view, that is a good capability."
"I have found that all of the features are valuable. It is very easy to deploy because we are able to port users directly from Active Directory (AD) and LDAP."
"Stable network administration solution that can be installed easily, and comes with fast technical support."
"The most valuable features are authentication, we have more granular control on the access policies for the administrators. The solution is easy to use, has a center point administration, and has a good GUI."
"Provides a good overview of all devices on a network."
"The most valuable feature of Forescout Platform is that it has everything that Aruba has at significantly less cost."
"The 802.1X compliance authentication feature of this solution is very good."
"This solution can be used to organize guest portals, integrate switches, and create policies. Some of its standard use cases also include completing key process upgrades and anti-virus of Windows OS."
"Forescout is easy to integrate with a lot of end systems."
"The most valuable features of the Forescout Platform are NAC for sharing, Network Access Control, and port sharing of the devices."
"Forescout Platform is stable, it is great."
"The stability is amazing for the Forescout Platform. We have been using Forescout for four years, and no one complained about the stability."
"The area where things could be improved is education. It's complicated to deploy initially because you have to know what you're getting into."
"The admin interface is really slow. It's horrible."
"Whenever we see the authentication logs, we can't see what device we're logging into... We can see who logged in, but we can't see the IP address of the device... I'm sure that's available. We just haven't figured out how to properly deploy it."
"The interface could be more user-friendly and the ability to apply rules to MAC addresses, for example, if I wanted to allow a certain MAC address access at a particular time I cannot make this adjustment."
"A main issue is that the upgrade process, over time, is extraordinarily fragile. Repeatedly, over the past several years, when we've tried to upgrade our Cisco ISE implementation, the upgrade has broken it. Ultimately, we have then had to rebuild it because we need it."
"Also, the menus could have been much simpler. There are many redundant things. That's a problem with all Cisco solutions. There are too many menus and redundant things on all of them."
"Third-party integration is important, as well as the continuous adaptation feature which is the AIOps. It would be helpful to include the AIOps."
"The solution lacks properly knowledgeable support, especially internationally, and this is why I am exploring other applications."
"Can be expensive if it's only being used for one feature."
"In the next release of the solution, it could benefit from being more flexible to allow for more freedom."
"Two things can be improved in the Forescout Platform. First of all, the support for some certain proprietary protocols from other vendors, but they are very widely used. If the TechEx from Cisco, was added to Forescout, then it will be a full solution for me."
"When we automate an email to send to a user, sometimes it gets blocked, but that has nothing to do with Forescout. It depends on the mail gateway that we use or integrate with."
"Forescout needs to upgrade its development in the future."
"I believe that the overall user experience has not always been preferable."
"Forescout Platform isn't flexible with connections to devices like printers and forces you to re-enter details like the MAC address after any breakdowns."
"The installation is not secure because it takes high admin privileges."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 60 reviews while Forescout Platform is ranked 3rd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 27 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Forescout Platform is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Secures devices and has good support, but needs a better interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forescout Platform writes "We can go granular on each endpoint, quarantine non-compliant machines, and target vulnerabilities through scripting". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security, whereas Forescout Platform is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Armis, Tenable.sc and Microsoft Intune. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Forescout Platform report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.