We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"It's very easy to access support and the documentation is self-explanatory."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility as it supports solutions from multiple vendors."
"We find that at the end of the projects we manage, all functionalities perform quite well. We've tested it a lot and find it to be overall a very good solution."
"A mature and functional product."
"The interface is very easy to use and the workflow is quite straightforward."
"The aspect of Aruba ClearPass that I like most is that it has a lot of options, it is very versatile."
"We think it's simple. We think it's very useful and we really like reports and everything."
"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 initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up."
"The user management has been very easy for the most part."
"Its feature that I have found most valuable is that it is very granular. You can configure granular controls just as you want those policies to be implemented. It gives you that flexibility to go granular in how you want your controls to be implemented. That's something I like about it."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment, which does not require the use of an agent."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"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."
"The solution needs to upgrade its user interface. Right now, it's not so user friendly, and it's an aspect that my clients' wish was improved upon."
"In the future, I would like to see plugins for AI and machine learning."
"The licensing model could be improved."
"The interface could be made easier and more intuitive."
"Some functions could be improved."
"The initial setup was quite complex, it is not that easy."
"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."
"They need to handle their Tier 1 cases differently. The biggest negative regarding Forescout is their support. Not having the ability to get instantly transferred to a support engineer for Tier 1 cases is pretty ridiculous."
"Although Forescout manages endpoints and network devices, there is no capability for user management."
"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."
"As a user, if I am using a laptop that is Wi-Fi connected, Forescout identifies my port connectivity as one user license, and if I take that same laptop with the same username to a wired network, which is also the same network that is used for the Wi-Fi connection, Forescout detects it as a separate license."
"It's scalable, but not without a big investment. It doesn't do so well at the branch. At the home office, it does okay and not so well at the branch."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The solution could always improve by adding more features to make it more robust."
"The pricing is not bad and everything is included."
"Time savings in finding rogue devices as well as identifying potentially unwanted devices on the network has saved the organization time and money."
"The ROI is priceless."
"Forescout Platform is too expensive, so the price should be reduced."
"It might not be the cheapest solution, but you get what you pay for."
"We might have paid in the ballpark of $20,000 yearly for our licenses. I do not recall there being other fees over and above the standard licensing fee."
"Licenses are perpetual but can come with renewable support."
"They base the license on the number of devices, which is quite misleading."
"The setup cost, pricing, and licensing are on the high side."
ClearPass Policy Manager provides secure network access in a world made up of mobile and IoT devices. It features ultra-scalable AAA with RADIUS and uses contextual data based on every user and device to enforce adaptive policies for wireless, wired or VPN access.
ForeScout offers Global 2000 enterprises and government organizations the unique ability to see devices, including non-traditional devices, the instant they connect to the network. Equally important, ForeScout lets you control these devices and orchestrate information sharing and operation among disparate security tools to accelerate incident response. Unlike traditional security alternatives, ForeScout achieves this without requiring software agents or previous device knowledge. The company’s solutions integrate with leading network, security, mobility and IT management products to overcome security silos, automate workflows and enable significant cost savings.
Aruba ClearPass is ranked 3rd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 6 reviews while Forescout Platform is ranked 2nd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 17 reviews. Aruba ClearPass is rated 8.6, while Forescout Platform is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Aruba ClearPass writes "Excellent for securing local networks, very stable, and easily scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forescout Platform writes "Identifying potentially unwanted devices on the network has saved the organization time and money". Aruba ClearPass is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Ruckus Cloudpath, Microsoft Intune and Sophos Network Access Control, whereas Forescout Platform is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Armis, Portnox CORE and CyberX. See our Aruba ClearPass 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.