We performed a comparison between Forescout Platform and Portnox CORE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Forescout has a feature that blocks the endpoint at the point of collection. It sets preconditions and will block the system if those aren't met."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"The visibility is the main benefit. We now know how many devices are connected, what the use for each device is and what kind of devices we have in our environment."
"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."
"The actions that the agentless visibility, allow us to perform on the endpoint, are really amazing, especially in the way that it is done."
"The 802.1X compliance authentication feature of this solution is very good."
"Being able to actively identify the client without a certificate allows you to control every device on your network regardless of the make, model, and software running. This allows for end-to-end security."
"Previous to the deployment we didn't have complete visibility of all the endpoints, all the devices that are connected to the network. But with the deployment of portnox, we could see all the devices and where they're connecting. We can equally segregate and apply different rules, policies to each location that we didn't monitor specifically."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"I am impressed with the solution's voucher capability and authentication. The tool is integrated with Active Direct storage."
"For the information security team, the security level was improved because it helped to manage and prevent rogue devices from connecting to the corporate network. The reporting was granular, and reports we scheduled for delivery on Portnox were useful during investigations and audits, especially in cases where the IP address changed."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"Technical support was very helpful when we needed them."
"The minute people have issues on their network, we can see what is happening right away."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"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."
"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."
"I believe that the overall user experience has not always been preferable."
"Other solutions have TACACS+, but Forescout does not. In the next release, I would like to see Forescout have accounting."
"The solution needs more definitive pricing. The costs are hard to nail down."
"This solution is not that easy to scale but this depends on a company's needs."
"For the user, the policy that they have implemented sometimes needs adjustments. Sometimes the features that the customer asks for aren't involved in the main installation, and I need to bolt an add-on in. However, I never know if this policy is the right one when I do this."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The price could be better."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"The product should consider more integration with vendors like Huawei. It should also improve visibility. The solution should offer a partner portal that can provide customers training on the in and out of the solution."
Forescout Platform is ranked 4th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 69 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 10th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews. Forescout Platform is rated 8.4, while Portnox CORE is rated 8.2. 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 Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". Forescout Platform is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Nozomi Networks and Ivanti NAC, whereas Portnox CORE is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Portnox Clear and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Forescout Platform vs. Portnox CORE 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.