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."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."
"We think it's simple. We think it's very useful and we really like reports and everything."
"Forescout Platform has granular features and one of the most impressive features is the agentless feature."
"This solution can be used to organize guest portals, integrate switches, and create policies. Some of its standard use cases also include completing key process upgrades and anti-virus of Windows OS."
"You can quickly filter your view of devices and zero in on the ones you want using a variety of tools, such as what subnet it is on or what it has been classified as."
"The most valuable features of the Forescout Platform are NAC for sharing, Network Access Control, and port sharing of the devices."
"It has helped with improving our security posture in terms of controlling the access of rogue devices into our network through identification. We have been able to prevent rogue device activities on the network, check the health of the system, and ensure remediation."
"Forescout Platform's most valuable features are that it is very granular. We are able to cull out a lot of information about our particular device or endpoint. The configuration and the visibility are very seamless. Overall the solution is very easy to handle and it's very comprehensive."
"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."
"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."
"It's a stable product."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"I am impressed with the solution's voucher capability and authentication. The tool is integrated with Active Direct storage."
"Initially, the implementation of the Forescout Platform took some time to figure out. The reason is we are a manufacturing unit and we have certain silos that are insulated areas where certain systems will not connect to the internet or to the LAN. Since there are many parts of it, we have to have an inclusive view of all those systems. It took a while for us to initially implement, but after a few months, everything worked well."
"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."
"We have found that the agent-based authentication, available within this solution could be improved."
"Other solutions have TACACS+, but Forescout does not. In the next release, I would like to see Forescout have accounting."
"As a product, there is nothing to complain about. However, they should improve their overall support. You need that level of knowledge, that level of information is clearly not available. First and foremost, that information is not accessible. The second point to mention is that once you purchase the later support and services. That is, they will continue to charge you for every service."
"The solution's customer support is bad and should be improved."
"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."
"The solution does have a bit of complexity, and there's some complexity in the deployment. Users need to be trained before undertaking an initial setup."
"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."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"The product should consider more integration with vendors like Huawei. It should also improve visibility. The solution should offer a partner portal that can provide customers training on the in and out of the solution."
"The price could be better."
Forescout Platform is ranked 4th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 69 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 12th 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.
