We performed a comparison between Forescout Platform and Palo Alto Networks IoT Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IoT Security 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."
"The most valuable features are remote access and administration scripts."
"Forescout CounterACT has allowed us to better open our access and control wireless access globally from our HQ. This allows us to monitor the network access for every office globally. This has improved overall security, reducing risk and opening up the opportunity to provide greater end user flexibility."
"The standout strength of this solution lies in its unique capability to effectively manage unmanaged switches."
"The plugins are very robust -- the ability scanner, patch management system, and SQL integrator."
"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."
"We use the Forescout Platform for device visibility and control in our network. It's very helpful for tracking malicious or unusual activity. We use it to track which ports are open, which machines are running specific services, and to identify vulnerabilities. For example, there was a vulnerability related to SMB, and we could use the product to determine which machines inside our organization were allowing SMB traffic."
"The most valuable features of ForeScout is the fact that it can do network access control either with 802.1x or without 802.1x."
"Single-pass traffic processing enables very high throughput and low latency."
"From a security standpoint, it provides a comprehensive range of standard security features that align with our requirements."
"This solution has been most valuable for establishing a VPN and implementing allow/deny rules. It has also enabled us to create security policies. It is an easy solution to customise when it comes to creating templates and pulling reports."
"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."
"The fact that Forescout Platform doesn't have a presence in the South African region is a weakness because of which you can't ask for help from them if you have any problems."
"Two things can be improved in the Forescout Platform. First of all, the support for some certain proprietary protocols from other vendors, but they are very widely used. If the TechEx from Cisco, was added to Forescout, then it will be a full solution for me."
"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."
"The initial setup was complex."
"The installation is not secure because it takes high admin privileges."
"Search - needs boolean functionality (or pseudo operand now working)."
"When we automate an email to send to a user, sometimes it gets blocked, but that has nothing to do with Forescout. It depends on the mail gateway that we use or integrate with."
"The reporting for this solution could be improved. The logs we receive are only saved for one week. We would like to have the database timeframe increased to a month or two for historical reporting as well as increased storage capabilities to support this data and reporting."
"It would be beneficial to have a more centralized and user-friendly platform that could consolidate all the necessary information, which proved challenging during the initial POC phase."
"The cost is still high and licensing is still complex."
Forescout Platform is ranked 1st in IoT Security with 69 reviews while Palo Alto Networks IoT Security is ranked 4th in IoT Security with 3 reviews. Forescout Platform is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks IoT Security is rated 8.4. 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 Palo Alto Networks IoT Security writes "Good high throughput and low latency with a great Sp3 Engine". Forescout Platform is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Nozomi Networks and Armis, whereas Palo Alto Networks IoT Security is most compared with Nozomi Networks, Armis and Allot IoTSecure. See our Forescout Platform vs. Palo Alto Networks IoT Security report.
See our list of best IoT Security vendors.
We monitor all IoT Security 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.
