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."The user interface is quite simple."
"The most valuable feature of the Forescout Platform is the large capacity it can handle. Additionally, the interface of the platform is good."
"Provides a good overview of all devices on a network."
"The stability is amazing for the Forescout Platform. We have been using Forescout for four years, and no one complained about the stability."
"Vulnerability remediation is valuable. We can narrow down a system and its properties. We can go granular on the properties of each endpoint, such as which operating system you're using."
"The 802.1X compliance authentication feature of this solution is very good."
"The most valuable features of ForeScout is the fact that it can do network access control either with 802.1x or without 802.1x."
"Within three or four days, we have complete visibility of your infrastructure on the network. Compared to other solutions, the deployment of the solution is easier and we can close the project quickly."
"There is an add-on feature for application control to kill unwanted applications when launched on a user's device."
"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."
"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 Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"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 agentless, and it's scalable."
"This solution is not that easy to scale but this depends on a company's needs."
"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 experienced some detection issues when checking compliance for the Sophos agent."
"I should be able to integrate my Forescout with any other third party security technology, to build that connected security strategy."
"Forescout needs to improve its cloud management and remote connectivity."
"Search - needs boolean functionality (or pseudo operand now working)."
"Although Forescout manages endpoints and network devices, there is no capability for user management."
"Definitely, having more third-party integration would be an improvement."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"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 could be a little cheaper."
"The integration between Portnox CORE and Portnox CLEAR can be better. These are two different systems, and there is no unique console for both devices. Portnox CORE is agentless, whereas Portnox CLEAR is not agentless."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"The price could be better."
"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."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
Forescout Platform is ranked 3rd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 69 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 11th 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.
