We performed a comparison between Forescout Platform and Sophos Network Access Control 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."Being able to sort on device types or devices with open ports is helpful when narrowing down assets of possible misconfigured devices that may be vulnerable on the network. We can take action on those devices based off of corporate policy."
"We really like that we get full visibility of devices in the local network."
"The most valuable feature of Forescout Platform is that it has everything that Aruba has at significantly less cost."
"The solution's implementation and operation are very easy."
"This is clearly the best product for the NAC use cases in this field for Forescout."
"The most valuable feature is the blocking of USB devices."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"The stability is amazing for the Forescout Platform. We have been using Forescout for four years, and no one complained about the stability."
"Sophos' technical support is great, very fast and responsive, and they always know how to fix the problem."
"There is really good visibility for the appliance."
"Sophos has helped us to save time and money and to better manage web activities. It has also helped us to reduce misuse of the network and restrict hacking attempts."
"What Sophos has done is integrate almost the entire OSI layer infrastructure. It gives me visibility across my infrastructure. It gives me visibility into all the mobile devices that are on my network and into the security I have on those mobile devices."
"The installation is very straightforward."
"The most valuable features of Sophos Network Access Control are the quick response times to threats and reliable security."
"Sophos Network Access Control has a useful interface, and I like its dashboard, which is very useful for us to check everything."
"The wifi control is fantastic and makes it very easy to administer."
"Regarding pricing, there is room for improvement to enhance competitiveness with other vendors and solutions."
"The cost is too high."
"We experienced some detection issues when checking compliance for the Sophos agent."
"When adding what is in scope to a policy, it would be nice if you could select multiple policies instead of one policy at a time to add what is in the scope for network segmentation. I have found that during the install and configuration of the policies that if you want to modify multiple policies or enable multiple policies that you need to define what is in the scope (IP range or segments) one rule at a time. This caused some slow downs when implementing policies."
"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."
"The solution needs more definitive pricing. The costs are hard to nail down."
"Definitely, having more third-party integration would be an improvement."
"If older network devices are used there can be some compatibility issues while using the Forescout Platform. Additionally, if the switches that are deployed in your infrastructure are not captured properly to the endpoints there might be some difficulties with Forescout Platform trying to monitor the network traffic. Traffic management is an area the vendor should work on."
"An area that could be improved is the information about licensing, which is fairly confusing at present."
"The user interface, in terms of managing the product, could be better."
"What needs to be improved on is the fact that Sophos consumes a lot of processor resources and, once it starts scanning, the RAM utilization is very high."
"I would like to see mobile administration capabilities in the next release so that we can administer the device from a mobile device."
"The interface on the cloud could be a bit better - just to give more performance on it."
"In order to provide better management, it would be ideal with they offered better plugins for their firewall."
"I would like more details on the incoming connection, like what is the download speed and how it fluctuates. If Sophos can give that information, it would be really good."
"Sophos Network Access Control requires a lot of resources to work, which is an area for improvement. Pricing could also be improved because it's costly."
More Sophos Network Access Control Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forescout Platform is ranked 4th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 69 reviews while Sophos Network Access Control is ranked 7th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 18 reviews. Forescout Platform is rated 8.4, while Sophos Network Access Control is rated 8.6. 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 Sophos Network Access Control writes "An affordable solution that provides web protection, URL filtering, and application filtering". Forescout Platform is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Nozomi Networks and Armis, whereas Sophos Network Access Control is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and Ruckus Cloudpath. See our Forescout Platform vs. Sophos Network Access Control 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.