We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Cisco is a worldwide, well-known, trusted, and respected branded product, and despite its known complexities, Cisco ISE pushes just ahead of Forescout Platform. Forescout Platform has just a few buggy issues and is lacking in some reporting structure, which makes Cisco ISE an easier choice.
"Cisco ISE's profiling and posturing features ensure that all devices are compliant with regulatory authorities."
"At the moment, ISE seems to integrate very well with a number of other technologies."
"I have found that all of the features are valuable. It is very easy to deploy because we are able to port users directly from Active Directory (AD) and LDAP."
"I've had no issues with scalability. I started using it on two campuses, and now I'm using it across the country and scaling it across subsidiaries in other countries."
"The access policies, and all of the policies in Cisco ISE, are important to us."
"The live logs and live sessions for troubleshooting are the most valuable features because they provide a detailed report of any issues."
"It's scalable."
"Since migrating towards doing wired ports over ISE with 802.1X and MAB authentication, our organization's security risk has been better. We have been able to establish better layouts, so devices can move and we don't have to worry about where they need to go."
"The 802.1X compliance authentication feature of this solution is very good."
"The actions that the agentless visibility, allow us to perform on the endpoint, are really amazing, especially in the way that it is done."
"We think it's simple. We think it's very useful and we really like reports and everything."
"This is clearly the best product for the NAC use cases in this field for Forescout."
"I have noticed that in the last year the license model has changed from licensing the whole appliance to licensing the number of devices. It's more simple for a large installation, or a user to have CounterACT as their peripheral site in the company. It's a good choice to have changed the license policy."
"The solution's implementation and operation are very easy."
"Forescout Platform is stable, it is great."
"We really like that we get full visibility of devices in the local network."
"If I was going to improve anything, it would be the ease of migration. It's really difficult at the moment if you're looking to upgrade ISE 2.1 and you want to go to ISE 3.1 or 3.2, that whole upgrade path and, particularly, the licensing is quite a minefield to sort out."
"Cisco ISE's real-time data analytics for database logging could be improved."
"The licensing documentation needs to be better."
"I don't like the fact that we can see the logs only for 24 hours. Maybe that happens because of the way we set it up."
"Its user interface could be better. It's not bad. They've just redesigned the whole user interface. It's not terribly difficult. The drop-down menus are easy to use. However, when you're looking for some things in the user interface, it takes a minute to find where you were prior."
"The opinion of my coworkers, and it's mine as well, is that the user interface could use some tender loving care. It seems counterintuitive sometimes. If you go to the logs, it's hard to figure out which one you need to look at."
"It would be helpful for us to know what needs to be deployed, configured, and what changes we need to make to our devices when we don't receive the specific login which is an indication of a lack of connection or incorrect configuration."
"There should be an easier way to do the upgrades. There are a lot of steps to get to the next version from the previous version which ends up being a bit of the headache with the upgrade."
"The product needs to improve its support. I know a case that dragged on for about one and a half years. They eventually suggested professional services and closed the ticket. We followed their advice, engaging the account manager and professional service team, only to discover that the issue was a bug. After reopening the case, it's been about six months, and the problem still hasn't been resolved."
"This solution is not that easy to scale but this depends on a company's needs."
"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."
"Forescout needs to improve its cloud management and remote connectivity."
"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."
"The solution's customer support is bad and should be improved."
"The system controls could be better."
"The cost is too high."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 136 reviews while Forescout Platform is ranked 3rd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 69 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Forescout Platform is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forescout Platform writes "We can go granular on each endpoint, quarantine non-compliant machines, and target vulnerabilities through scripting". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security, whereas Forescout Platform is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Nozomi Networks, Armis and Tenable Security Center. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Forescout Platform 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.