We performed a comparison between Forescout Platform and Impulse Point SafeConnect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."Emergency response, risk assessment information to get a view of the of the vulnerability."
"We really like that we get full visibility of devices in the local network."
"Forescout is easy to integrate with a lot of end systems."
"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."
"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."
"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 plugins are very robust -- the ability scanner, patch management system, and SQL integrator."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"It is very easy to scale the product."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"Forescout needs to improve its cloud management and remote connectivity."
"In the next release of the solution, it could benefit from being more flexible to allow for more freedom."
"Although Forescout manages endpoints and network devices, there is no capability for user management."
"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."
"It's scalable, but not without a big investment. It doesn't do so well at the branch. At the home office, it does okay and not so well at the branch."
"Custom integrations need to be better."
"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 solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
Earn 20 points
Forescout Platform is ranked 4th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 69 reviews while Impulse Point SafeConnect is ranked 17th in Network Access Control (NAC). Forescout Platform is rated 8.4, while Impulse Point SafeConnect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Forescout Platform writes "We can go granular on each endpoint, quarantine non-compliant machines, and target vulnerabilities through scripting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Impulse Point SafeConnect writes "Easy to scale, enforces policies well, and has responsive technical support". Forescout Platform is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Nozomi Networks and Armis, whereas Impulse Point SafeConnect is most compared with .
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.
