Forescout Platform Reviews

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.

This solution could be improved if there was functionality or module integration to connect Forescout with open source, container areas or Terraform.  It would also be useful if this solution could run with network plugins to Kubernetes. 

I have been using this solution for three years. 

This is a stable solution but does require additional servers if we want to make use of the full functionality of the solution. 

This solution is not that easy to scale but this depends on a company's needs. 

For our business, if we want to connect to the host, we can do it from one main office and can connect an inventory to those remote hosts from one point. If we want to collect spam traffic, for example, we cannot collect this traffic from one point, because a wider connection channel is needed. So in this case, we need to deploy an additional server for Forescout that will collect spam traffic and send method data to the main management server.

We have hardly needed support from the Forescout team. 

The initial setup was not that straightforward and configuration took a long time and required technical specialists. When assisting customers, we need to have a technical specialist onsite to deploy the solution. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

The installation is not secure because it takes high admin privileges.

Forescout is stable.

The initial setup is easy, taking no more than two or three weeks.

Forescout is more expensive than Cisco because Cisco gives high discounts.

Forescout is better for smaller organizations in sectors like education or hospitality. I would rate Forescout as five out of ten.

We are a solution provider and we are currently implementing this product for our customers.

One of the reasons we use Forescout is to differentiate between our employees and guests in the office. For employees, we want to make sure that all of the Wi-Fi devices connected to our infrastructure comply with our security regulations. For guests, or for subcontractors, our goal is to monitor and regulate access.

This also provides us with the ability to use automation during our compliance and review. For example, we can automate processes with third-party solutions such as Splunk, or our own firewall can have an automatic response based on the compliance results from Forescout.

The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment, which does not require the use of an agent.

We are satisfied with the interface.

Better integration with third-party vendors is needed because as it is now, the list of third-party solutions that we can integrate and automate is quite limited. We would like to see the list of vendors expanded to be broader.

The types of products that we would like to integrate with are firewalls, patch management solutions, and SIEM applications, for example.

We have been working with the Forescout Platform for about two years.

It is quite stable and we have not experienced any issues.

I thinking that Forescout scales well enough.

We are satisfied with technical support and have not had any problems with them.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. The length of time required for deployment depends on the number of use cases that we want to implement. For example, integration with different products will take longer to deploy than a simple REST API access or integration with Active Directory.

I would say that on average, it might take between two weeks and one month to deploy.

We have a system integrator to assist with deployment.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We needed this solution in order to block rogue devices (laptops, phones, etc) and block external devices.

ForeScout has given us the ability to block unwanted devices.

The most valuable feature is the blocking of USB devices.

The ability to block external devices in Mac is lacking and needs to be added.

We have been using ForeScout CounterACT for three years.

We are using the Forescout Platform mostly for the Bring Your Own Device features. So we like it very much. We like the dashboard, the usability, and the Bring Your Own Device feature. That's our main usage of the Forescout.

We are really adapted to the product. So we find it perfect.

Now that I'm used to it I don't see many places to improve it. We really like it as it is. We think it's simple. We think it's very useful and we really like reports and everything. We like it very much.

The biggest disadvantage is the pricing. I can see that the product has value. I see that the product is really good. I think that the pro is it's really stable, but price-wise, I think it's bad. But you have to pay for quality. But the pricing can be a little bit improved in my point of view. It will be harder to choose if we start comparing features and prices and when we made the initial choice. Our choice was based mainly on features. There was no price comparison involved. I think that it is not in the same landscape. The landscape has changed and there are a lot of contenders in this field. The price scale could be improved.

I have worked with Forescout Device Visibility and Control Platform for two years.

The availability is one hundred percent available. So we don't have issues with that also, so very good.

The installation is small enough, it's 500 users and there are no issues with the performance. So our escalation costs, we are small so it's perfect. I've had no issues. The availability is one hundred percent available. So we don't have issues with that also, so very good.

Technical support was really great at the beginning of the setup. At the moment we don't use it because the product is very good. I cannot say if it's good or it's bad because we don't use it, we don't see any issues. It's very good. So for me, I cannot tell you if the support is fast or it's slow, or if it's good or bad because we don't use it. No, we don't use the support.

The initial setup was straightforward. We have help from the manufacturer, so to put it in place it was straightforward. We have been using it for two years now with no issues.

The pricing is really bad. We think that it's expensive. So the pricing part is expensive.

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 buy it. 

I would rate Forscout Device Visibility and Control Platform at a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for Network Access Control to prevent rogue devices connecting into the network.

This product allows monitoring and control of the PC fleet across the company.

The most valuable features are remote access and administration scripts.

We experienced some detection issues when checking compliance for the Sophos agent.

CounterACT is a very flexible product in terms of deployment where the users will have a Layer 2 or Layer 3 deployment depending on their network infrastructure while maintaining the product's features regardless of which deployment. For larger scale projects which includes multiple sites, CounterACT can be easily deployed in a centralized or decentralized manner. Besides that, deploying CounterACT introduces almost little-to-no network infrastructure changes.

Integration with third-party products is also an important feature of CounterACT. While many of their competitors' products can only be integrated within their own portfolio, CounterACT manages to integrate with today's top security products to cover the security gaps that many solutions may introduce. CounterACT also provides a ControlFabric platform which may allow the users to integrate all of their security and network solutions into CounterACT.

As a distributor's engineer working on CounterACT, there are a few vast changes that I have seen after deploying CounterACT for our customers. A few of our customers reportedly had an easier time with their auditors on endpoint compliance, where they would only need to generate and turn in CounterACT's report. This saves both the customer's and the auditor's time.

Another improvement that we can see is automated security, where the customers would not need to manually turn on and off the switch ports for their guests. CounterACT automatically recognizes these guest and provides a self-registration feature to their guest while still maintaining the customer's network security posture.

There are few areas which will need vast improvements. The CounterACT graphical user interface could use a revamp as it may not look appealing enough to the end users.

Another area which the CounterACT should improve is their ability to deliver a more precise error messages to their users. At times, the error messages are not clear enough and are too technical to understand. Some of their error messages are not generic, as they are only understandable by the ForeScout engineers.

I've used it for three years.

There were no issues with deployment.

There are few issues with CounterACT that need more attention, mainly it's ability to process and perform discovery faster. At times, CounterACT takes too long to determine the endpoints, which may cause delays to the end users.

CounterACT could also use a more stable management console interface. This is because there will be times where CounterACT takes too long to login to its management console.

Another issue with CounterACT is that it does not provide very meaningful error messages when some error occurs. The error messages are hidden and it does not show unless the users click on a specific button or mouse over to the problematic elements.

There have been no issues scaling it.

The Customer Service is very responsive and helpful. They managed to resolve most of our issues with the products without much hassle.

The Technical Support is very responsive and helpful. They managed to resolve most of our issues with the products without much hassle.

Initial setup is very straightforward because there are only a few network configurations needed to be done. It does not require any downtime and could be deployed at any time during production hour. There are a few endpoint configurations that need to be done, which users can do so through their Microsoft ActiveDirectory or desktop management tools or software.

We implemented the solutions with our S.I. To ensure a smooth implementation, it is crucial to have all the endpoints and network requirements ready and configured before CounterACT is installed. It is recommended to start with the default policies and work on these policies to meet customers' requirements.

As we are an implementer, we do have an ROI for all our products.

For pricing and licensing, CounterACT is not an overly expensive product. They can fit most of our customers' budgets.

We managed to evaluate Cisco ISE. Cisco ISE is a complex solutions to deploy where it only supports users who use Cisco switches.

ForeScout CounterACT is a much more appealing product because of the market here in Malaysia, where the users uses multiple brands of switches with complex network infrastructure. CounterACT could easily adapt to these environments without any changes made to the customer's network infrastructure.

ForeScout CounterACT is like a Pandora's box, which contains a lot of functionalities that can be used to improve the customer's daily operation tasks and reduces manual workforce. It is recommended that the implementer understand what CounterACT can be used to do as different customers' business functions could use different functions of CounterACT.

Right now, we are looking to implement the solution in a hospital where a lot of people come to the lobby and are outsiders or guests. The VOD and guests' mobile phones will be able to connect to the Wi-Fi. This is the latest use case we are working on.

The solution offers very good management.

It allows for good detection of all the vendor products we have on-site.

The solution is very similar to other solutions, so it's not hard to figure out how to use it.

The solution could always improve by adding more features to make it more robust.

I deployed the solution for one project about a year and a half ago. I may implement another one for another project this year.

The scalability is quite good. It does depend on the complexity of the setup, but for our purposes, we've never run into any issues.

We've never had to contact technical support. We've never had a need to do so yet. I can't speak to the level of service they provide. We have our own team in-house that will troubleshoot if we run into problems.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not complex.

It took us about one week to deploy the solution. It didn't take long to set everything up.

I'm basically focusing on the product line right now. It's pretty good. The nice thing about it is that at last, we have a kind of software that's very easy to work with.

While most people in most of the cases do not want to go for Mac, in the case of cybersecurity, I believe it is very important to do so. In enterprise cases, the common culture is the DYD. Organizations need to add some sort of network access control to prevent many issues.

I'd rate the solution itself eight out of ten overall. It's quite good, but it could always continue to improve.