Forescout Platform vs Fortinet FortiNAC comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Forescout Platform
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (1st), Endpoint Compliance (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (14th)
Fortinet FortiNAC
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
4th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 13.7%, up from 12.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiNAC is 20.1%, up from 17.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC)
Unique Categories:
IoT Security
17.8%
Endpoint Compliance
1.6%
No other categories found
 

Q&A Highlights

it_user781137 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 24, 2018
 

Featured Reviews

MG
Nov 9, 2022
We can go granular on each endpoint, quarantine non-compliant machines, and target vulnerabilities through scripting
Logging would be one area for improvement. When we're troubleshooting, there are not a lot of clear things on Google that we can look up for ourselves. When we have an issue with it, we have to call the company to get the vendors involved. The logging of Forescout is horrible compared to other things that we've used. We don't use ISE, but based on what we heard from the users we've reached out to who do use ISE, the logging capabilities of ISE are better, and troubleshooting is so much easier with ISE than it is with Forescout. It doesn't have a lot of end-user support after the purchase of the license. There is no training either for Forescout. That's something that it's lacking. We need refresher training. The vendors came out and trained us whenever we first set up Forescout, but we have people coming and going all the time. There are some things that we wish that it would do. We use ACAS, which is a reporting tool that scans our network and then lets us know what kind of vulnerabilities are on the network. It would be nice if there was a way to connect Forescout. I know ISE connects with our configuration management tools to push patches and things like that out to a large array of machines. With Forescout, we can push some patches out, but it can't handle anything on a large scale. So, we wish that Forescout would be able to handle more and connect to some of the other tools that we use. We have 15 different tools that do pretty much the same thing but in a different way to get a good picture of our network. It would be nice if we can condense that down or have something that is a central hub-type tool that can reach out to some of our other tools, compile the data better, and have that data in one place.
Heeralal Yadav - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 28, 2024
Has automatic threat response capabilities, is scalable, and is easy to deploy
We use Fortinet FortiNAC to protect against IoT threats Fortinet FortiNAC's automatic threat response capability is good. Fortinet FortiNAC offers several valuable features, including data security, 99 percent uptime with VPN connections, MAC filtering, and traffic prioritization. Fortinet…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up."
"The most valuable features are remote access and administration scripts."
"The standout strength of this solution lies in its unique capability to effectively manage unmanaged switches."
"The most valuable feature is the blocking of USB devices."
"Forescout Platform provides multiple features. They have a very effective device fingerprinting in their cloud. You do not need to add any devices manually, such as in Mac devices. Other solutions you have to add IoT devices and OT devices manually. This is one of the major areas that Forescout Platform is excelling in."
"I have noticed that in the last year the license model has changed from licensing the whole appliance to licensing the number of devices. It's more simple for a large installation, or a user to have CounterACT as their peripheral site in the company. It's a good choice to have changed the license policy."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment, which does not require the use of an agent."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"I like FortiNAC's integration with other Fortinet devices. They work together well, but the solution also works with other network devices."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiNAC are user device management and there are plenty of policies."
"The FortiNAC features I found the most valuable are security and the ability to consolidate wireless networks."
"Fortinet FortiNAC offers several valuable features, including data security, 99 percent uptime with VPN connections, MAC filtering, and traffic prioritization."
"The features are more expandable."
"The product offers good profiling features and can support various vendor products."
"Provides good performance, is easy to use and configure."
"The most valuable aspect of Fortinet FortiNAC is the control it offers."
 

Cons

"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."
"Regarding pricing, there is room for improvement to enhance competitiveness with other vendors and solutions."
"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."
"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."
"Definitely, having more third-party integration would be an improvement."
"Forescout Platform sometimes returns false positives, so there's some fine-tuning to be done there."
"The solution should include integration with other firewalls."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The reporting can also use improvement."
"FortiNAC could improve integration with other vendors."
"Admin UI could be better matched and easier to use; it cannot work as a RADIUS server."
"The training from Fortinet FortiNAC could improve. Fortinet has to plan for better training for its partners. Additionally, device management should have more integration with other devices, such as new and third-party devices."
"Fortinet FortiNAC could improve its hardware for use with cloud-based firewalls."
"Classifications and visibility need to be improved a lot. They have to start work on being agentless. Agentless means they need to have strong integration with Windows."
"The user interface and the product's intuitiveness could be improved."
"Its technical support needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The Forescout Platform's pricing is in the middle range, not too cheap or expensive."
"The cost of the solution depends on the customer's requirement because the customer is asking for different integration with a different product. Forescout Platform's price would start to get a bit higher. However, overall the price is a little expensive. It's can fit within the customer budget."
"I would rate Forescout Platform's pricing as four out of five."
"Forescout Platform is on the expensive side."
"They base the license on the number of devices, which is quite misleading."
"The product's pricing is reasonable."
"There are no additional costs that I am aware of."
"Devices with multiple IP's count multiple times against your license count."
"The price of the license required is based on how many users are going to be using the solution. If you want more users you can upgrade your license."
"It is a reasonable product."
"The licensing fees are a little bit high."
"It's a subscription-based license, which is based on the usage and number of concurrent users."
"The price of Fortinet FortiNAC is less than Cisco's solution. However, the price could improve by being reduced."
"FortiNAC's price has gone up in the last year. However, compared to other solutions, such as Cisco ISE, it is cheaper."
"The price is fair and reasonable for our clients."
"The solution is expensive. However, it is not as expensive as other solutions, such as Cisco ISE."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

it_user781137 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 24, 2018
Sep 24, 2018
Thank for your nice works. I am working on the similar type comparison between Fortescout, FortiNAC(Bradford) and ISE for a project in a healthcare organization.
See 2 answers
Sep 7, 2018
Hi Nkwa, I did some research comparing ForeScout with ClearPass. Fundamentally they do the same but in a very different ways. It is important to understand these differences and how they could help you to achieve or not what you need in your organization. I will only point these differences and not every single detail. This is based on my own experience and I do not represent either ForeScout or Aruba ClearPass. DISCOVERY PROCESS / Profiler - METHODS. • NetFlow or SFlow: ForeScout do not support Sflow only NetFlow. Is this important? Yes, it is if your switches are not Cisco or any other vendor that support the NetFlow protocol. ForeScout says: "This capability becomes more relevant in large scale deployments, where the CounterACT packet engine is limited in its "ability to detect activity in remote sites and branch offices". Use of information reported by NetFlow improves visibility and speeds detection of new endpoints." Reference: https:\www.forescout.com\wp-content\uploads\2018\04\CounterACT_NetFlow_1.2.pdf Page 3. ClearPass: NetFlow V5/V9 and V10 aka IPFIX + sFLOW are supported. Reference: https://www.arubanetworks.com/techdocs/ClearPass/CP_ReleaseNotes_6.6.3/Content/WhatsNew/NewFeatures_ProfilerNWDiscovery.htm ORCHESTRATE = Integration/Collaboration with other Systems. ForeScout: * ForeScout is able to interchange contextual information with 3rd party solutions, however the most of the contextual collaboration capabilities are available using an Extended Module option and ForeScout charges separately for this. Reference Links: https://www.forescout.com/platform/extended-modules/#cmt https://www.cdw.com/product/forescout-extended-module-for-palo-alto-networks-next-generation-firewall/4589573 https://www.cdw.com/search/?key=forescout&searchscope=all&sr=1 Clear Pass: * 140+ Integrations are included as part of the core solution. Basically, you can integrate ClearPass to anything in your IT infrastructure at no extra cost to share contextual information. Firewalls, MDM, TicketSystem, SIEM, etc.. Using build-in Modules or APIs. You can request as well customized APIs. Reference Link https://www.arubanetworks.com/partners/programs/security-exchange/ Reference Link https://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/so/SO_ClearPassExchange.pdf AGENT OR AGENTLESS? Basically, an agent based solution needs a software installed, while an agentless approach don't. Independently of what NAC solution you will use, it is important to understand if you need or not an agent. When a device connects to a network, the agent software performs some actions that have been defined in a central access controller or policy management platform. If persistent, the agent performs auto-remediation functions during a connection and will permanently monitor the device throughout a session to “fix” things that may change. The dissolvable agent: a user clicks on a web portal link to download the agent, which authenticates the user and device, checks the endpoint for compliance, and allows access to the network if policy conditions are met. It then disappears until the user runs it again. ForeScout ForeScout is proud to claim that they don’t require an agent (agentless approach NAC) but this is not completely true. ForeScout needs a “dissolvable agent” for authorization & compliance of unmanaged assets e.g. Employee BYOD, Contractor Laptops, printers, CCTV cameras, Smart TVs, etc. Agentless is fine when all your devices are Windows and all of them are under your management. For none windows devices you will need the dissolvable agent to perform health check and remediation. Based on this explanation having an agent or not is irrelevant for most of the cases. there many identities sources from where you can extract contextual information to help the NAC to do his work, examples are: AD, Wireless AP, End-Point protection software, SCCM, MDM, the Switches, the Firewall, etc... To do this you need integration, this is possible with ForeScout using the extended module /Plugins and normally paying the extra cost. Reference Link: https://www.forescout.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Agentless-Visibility-and-Control-ForeScout-White-Paper.pdf ClearPass Clear pass can run with an agent and without the agent. It hast the persistence option, the dissolvable option for BYOD and Guest devices. It can be easily integrated to the mentioned identity stores at no extra cost. https://www.bradfordnetworks.com/agent-based-agent-less-other-understanding-the-different-ways-to-enable-nac/ http://community.arubanetworks.com/t5/Technology-Blog/When-and-why-agents-for-NAC-It-s-not-a-Secret/ba-p/256672 https://community.extremenetworks.com/extreme/topics/nac-vs-seperate-radius-server 802.1X RADIUS AUTHENTICATION OR NOT Here is one of the major differences. Both support Radius authentication. ClearPass see it like the most secure way to protect your network and ForeScout see it like something complex that you should try to avoid if possible, in my opinion. ForeScout * says: 802.1X presents several deployments, operational and troubleshooting challenges, particularly on wired networks. * To perform RADIUS-based network authentication you need a “Plugin” to forward the authentication requests to an external authentication Sever, like the Microsoft NPS. Page 10, Reference link , you will need as well a Switch Plugin for wired network RADIUS-based deployment and a Wireless plugin for wireless network RADIUS-based deployment. All this sounds like a complexity to me. * By not having 802.1x configured you save also configuring all switches on your network. Which is not a big problem because you do this once during the useful life of the switch. * Not build-in TACACS+ - centralized remote authentication to network devices like switches, routers, etc. Reference Link: https://www.forescout.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/CounterACT_RADIUS_4.3.pdf ClearPass: * Is build-in CA and if you like you can use an external CA as well. * Centralizing the radius authentication make the administration and configuration very easy because you don’t have to manage the NAC and the CA separated. * No plugin is needed for non-802.1x Auth and non-domain joined devices. In this case you can enforce machine authentication and many other security layers to allow non-domain devices to safely connect without a certificate. * non-domain devices can automatically or manually be provisioned using a guest network and dissolvable agent. * Integration with the Aruba Wireless system for Radius Authentication is very easy (if you own an Aruba Wireless Infrastructure) and no extra cost. You must configure your switches to work with 802.1x. This can be easily done using a template on HPE IMC. • Build in TACACS+ DEPLOYMENT AND INITIAL POLICY SETUP: ForeScout: preferred method is: I let you in then I find out who you are. • ForeScout CounterACT propose the Post-connect deployment strategy for network visibility and access control in which endpoints are initially allowed access to the network while CounterACT profiles them to determine ownership and compliance. Access to the network is then adjusted based on profiling results and security policy. Reference link: https://www.forescout.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/CounterACT-Deployment-Guide-Wired-Post-Connect.pdf This makes sense on new deployments because the NAC can be configured transparent to the end user with no dramatic impact. My question is: What is the process after deployment? Do I let you in then I find a good policy for you? ClearPass: preferred method is: I let you in if you tell me something about you. Then depending on the roles/policies this unknown device will be moved to a quarantine VLAN for remediation or moved to a dead end VLAN. At the same time this will trigger a ticket to helpdesk and a message to the user to know what is happening and what is the next step. SUPPORT, SERVICE and DOCUMENTATION: ForeScout: • The references are very good everywhere you read in internet. Also, the expertise of their engineers. You can browse a little and it won't be hard to find references. Online support, documentation, communities (forescout Chatter), etc. Aruba/HPE The references are very good everywhere you read in internet. Also, the expertise of their engineers. You can browse anywhere on internet and it won't be hard to find references. Online support, documentation, communities (aruba airheads), etc. PRICE: This will depend on many factors. I would suggest that you consult both and make your own decision.
ZF
Sep 24, 2018
Thank for your nice works. I am working on the similar type comparison between Fortescout, FortiNAC(Bradford) and ISE for a project in a healthcare organization.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
30%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
34%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
5%
 

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 is the biggest difference between Aruba ClearPass and FortiNAC?
I've done quite a lot of work with ClearPass, and not a lot with FortiNAC/Bradford. ClearPass incorporates a number of different functions including ClearPass Guest for creating complex wireless g...
How does Cisco ISE compare with Fortinet FortiNAC?
Cisco ISE uses AI endpoint analytics to identify new devices based on their behavior. It will also notify you if someone plugs in with a device that is not allowed and will block it. The user exper...
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiNAC?
The support responds to our queries within two to four hours.
 

Also Known As

Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
FortiNAC, Bradford Networks, Bradford Networks Sentry, Network Sentry Family
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NHS Sussex, SAP, SEGA, Vistaprint, Miami Children's Hospital, Pioneer Investments, New York Law School, OmnicomGroup, Meritrust
Isavia, Pepperdine University, Medical University of South Carolina, Columbia University Medical Center, Utah Valley University
Find out what your peers are saying about Forescout Platform vs. Fortinet FortiNAC and other solutions. Updated: July 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.