No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Forescout Platform vs Impulse Point SafeConnect comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Forescout Platform
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (5th), Endpoint Compliance (3rd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (29th)
Impulse Point SafeConnect
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 7.7%, down from 11.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Impulse Point SafeConnect is 1.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Forescout Platform7.7%
Impulse Point SafeConnect1.8%
Other90.5%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

AshishKumar Rai - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Comprehensive visibility has strengthened endpoint control and automated threat response across networks
When it comes to improving Forescout Platform, I have faced some issues recently, particularly with the switch integration part. When integrating a switch, it asks for the vendor type, and often it does not match. For example, one series of HP switches may not be found in that vendor list. This leads to frustration because you have to check again with different HP models, and once you integrate a switch, you cannot edit the vendor list without removing it. Other issues are being worked on, particularly related to switch integration. I believe they will be fixed in the next upgrade or patch fix. There are no major issues, but the configuration changes needed for the switch model are necessary, and I think it would help if during integration, an admin user could check the password or credential used, as they currently cannot see the password after it is entered and saved.
CD
Director of Computer Information Services at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Easy to scale, enforces policies well, and has responsive technical support
A lot of campuses use SafeConnect. It gives us good visibility and enforces policies. It helps enforce network security by scanning devices, making sure they have current and valid antivirus solutions with up-to-date antivirus definitions, and steers our end users by enforcing policy groups and steering them to the right access. Technical support is responsive. The stability is pretty good. It is very easy to scale the product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ForeScout has given us the ability to block unwanted devices."
"Automated policy enforcement is particularly valuable as it significantly reduces the need for manual intervention, thus enhancing efficiency and security."
"The compliance aspects of the solution are excellent and one of the solution's best features."
"It's one of the tools that has given the federal government visibility into network devices and everything."
"The most valuable feature is the blocking of USB devices."
"The most important feature is that this solution works well without a 802.1x feature, and you can use CounterACT to implement that feature and also have a very granular control of your devices, including shadow devices."
"Forescout Platform isn't cheap, but it's the best solution for the environment I'm dealing with."
"Forescout Platform has many features, and my favorite feature is that it has multiple methods to identify or discover the endpoints in your network, rather than focusing on only one technique or one method to identify the endpoints."
"It gives us good visibility and enforces policies, helps enforce network security by scanning devices, making sure they have current and valid antivirus solutions with up-to-date antivirus definitions, and steers our end users by enforcing policy groups and steering them to the right access."
"It is very easy to scale the product."
 

Cons

"It needs easier integration to other partners that automate functions within the security phase."
"Forescout Platform needs to improve how the device works in preventing rogue servers."
"Battled with the use of SNMP v1 instead of v2c Direct web interface rather than installation of a client."
"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."
"This solution is not that easy to scale but this depends on a company's needs."
"Other solutions have TACACS+, but Forescout does not. In the next release, I would like to see Forescout have accounting."
"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."
"It needs enhanced mobile support, but I have heard that this is coming."
"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive because you have to pay for their CSM, the customer's access manager, and their professional services on top of that, and they charge you roughly $400 per hour, which is overhead."
"The cost of licensing for this product is quite high, but this cost covers all the features of the solution so it is a single payment for the term that has been selected."
"The price of Forescout is reasonable when compared to Cisco ISE."
"The tool's pricing is expensive but reasonable."
"It might not be the cheapest solution, but you get what you pay for."
"They base the license on the number of devices, which is quite misleading."
"The pricing structure should be enhanced."
"For one license, we pay around 3,000 Indian rupees."
"For our tier group, for one year, the cost is probably around $10,000 for the license. If you do multi-year, you could get two years, and you could get it for about $8,000 per year. If you do three years, you get it around $7,000 a year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Government
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise45
No data available
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
SafeConnect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RWJ Barnabas HealthEnbridge EnergyToyota MotorsSt. Luke's University Health NetworkGlobal Credit Union
Aerohive Solution
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, ThreatLocker and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.