I would advise doing research on both ISE and Forescout.

I would rate Forescout an eight out of ten because it doesn't have a lot of end-user support after the purchase of the license. There are not a whole lot of training resources, and there is not a whole lot of troubleshooting help. 

It is purely based on the use case. If they have any issues with OT or IoT, this is the best solution. Otherwise, they can rely on other products if they are a typical non-manufacturing or non-healthcare organization.

ISE is also extremely expensive. They can look for anything cheaper than this. It is dependent on the use cases.

Because IoT and OT products are widely used in healthcare and manufacturing, and Forescout is the best.

I would rate Forescout Platform an eight out of ten. They mostly fail to provide support during and after deployment.

I would recommend this solution to others, it is the best in the market at this time.

I rate Forescout Platform a ten out of ten.

Before you begin deploying it, I would suggest that you define how you intend to use it. Just have an end state in mind so that you can build towards it and ensure you have all the functions you need for the design in place. Whatever you want to do with the data that comes out of it, try to define it first.

I would rate Forescout Platform a six out of ten.

One support person is enough for the maintenance of the solution if everything was set up correctly.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate the initial setup of the Forescout Platform an eight out of ten.

I'd give Forescout Platform a rating of nine out of ten.

My advice to others is Forescout Platform is a good solution. It's fairly simple to deploy in an environment, far better than the other products in which we have done a POC, has good stability and performance. 

I highly recommend it.

I rate Forescout Platform a ten out of ten.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

I rate Forescout Platform six out of 10.

My advice to others is to use the Forescout professional services. They are offering a fixed price to deploy the solution, and it's major pain relief as you are talking with experts committed to achieving your objectives.

I rate Forescout Platform a ten out of ten.

My company does help our customers manage Forescout Platform.

I would definitely recommend the solution to those planning to use it.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine and a half out of ten.

If you are looking for a NAC solution and you want to integrate the existing network infrastructure without upgrades or without replacing existing devices, then you should go with Forescout. Also, if you don't want to run an agent in the endpoint, Forescout is the way to go because it does not require an agent. It is optional. If you are concerned about having to run too many agents in your endpoint and don't want to add an another agent, this solution is a good choice.

Because Forescout has flexible integration and flexible pricing, I would give it a general rating of nine out of ten.

Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

The product has proven to be worth the cost and time savings alone in finding rogue devices. It helps with ROI and increasing our security posture. You can't protect what you don't know about or can't see.

Overall, I rate Forescout Platform an eight out of ten.

I recommend using the solution because it gives verified control over the environment. It has a great visibility feature. Also, it gives visibility on what's happening on the network. Proceed with the prerequisites, particularly the initial assessment. It has to be conducted properly. Otherwise, the solution might not follow a straightforward path.

The first step is the initial assessment, followed by the second step of collecting clear requirements. Clarity in requirements is crucial because the solution can be directed in any direction you tell it to go. Therefore, you need to know exactly what you need to do. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I would recommend Forescout Platform for smaller businesses but not for large ones. I would give Forescout Platform a rating of seven out of ten.

It is the only NAC product I know of that does not require 802.1x on every switch port. Big win. But, make sure that you invest in training up your personnel. It is not a simple product. 

Importantly, the vast capabilities make it worthwhile. 

This is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are customers. 

I'm not sure of the version we are using. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's just a bit too expensive. Still, I would recommend it.

We are users and a reseller. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I do not recall which version of the solution we are using. We use the on-premises deployment model, however, we also have some clients on the cloud.

I would advise other organizations that, if they have multi-vendors in their network, use Forescout. However, if most of the devices are Cisco, it is best to use Cisco ISE.

It is a great tool and solution. We looked into it with the Magic Quadrant of Gartner and we have seen that it is a leader in the space. However, for us, it just doesn't work as well in terms of compatibility.

I'd recommend the solution. I would rate it at an eight out of ten.

The product has been fantastic for us, meeting our needs. We have hardly had any bugs to speak of. With that being said, please allow Tier 1 cases to be directly transferred to an available engineer. 

The most important thing would be that a NAC project involves more than just the network. You've got to have client people, PKI people, active directory people all working together with the network to make this product work and make it happen. There's so many ways that it could interrelate. If you're in a very large company, you've got to break down the silo walls and get everybody together from the beginning to make this thing work out, but once you have those people together, this is something that every group wants to have. Desktop people want it, the mobile people want it, the scanning people. Everybody wants it once they see it, so it does sell itself, but you've got to have that education meeting up front.

If you have distributed services (DHCP), strategically ensure you generate reliable traffic to establish timely inspections. We've avoided the use of traps by centralizing our DHCP at HQ, but it causes black holes during inspection schedules in case of a static device being plugged in.

Overall, I would rate Forescout an eight out of ten.

Make sure to plan for all endpoints. If you want full coverage of your networks, account for anything that has an IP address. For example, a busy core switch can have 20+ IP addresses, and each one goes against your license count. Also, if you plan to have it behind a firewall, take into consideration your firewall's connection limitations. Although CounterACT isn't really a heavy bandwidth user, it does open a ton of short connections on a constant basis. The more you tune these down, the less accurate your real time host information becomes.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

We have around 50 people using the solution.

I would advise against investing in this solution for a small environment, as it is quite costly. For medium and enterprise-size environments, however, this is an option worth considering. The solution is much cheaper than Cisco ISE and Fortinet. 

The only community is still small.

I rate Forescout Platform a nine out of ten.

I would give Forescout Platform a rating of eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution because it has a lot of different ways of discovering different devices and showing networks. It's very flexible. I believe the reason we didn't reach our goal is because of our company decisions and not because of the solution. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

I was a partner of the company who was a Forescout Platform partner and I was responsible for bringing in Forescout, and establishing the service line for the Forescout Platform sales, pre-sales, and the implementation, but I am no longer with that company.

I would rate Forescout Platform an eight out of ten.

I highly recommend Forescout Platform, unless, there is a need to integrate with any Cisco TechEx environment. For other use cases, it should be the first choice as a NAC solution. It should come as the first option, with one exception only, if the environment has a lot of Cisco devices. The Forescout Platform does not support authentication to Cisco devices. There is a lack of some protocols on the box itself.

I rate Forescout Platforma nine out of ten.

Definitely use it. It's a good protection tool.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We try to always use the latest version of the solution.

We're a partner. We use various deployment models, depending on the company we are implementing the solution for. We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. We've been quite pleased with the solution so far.

The customers seem to be very happy with the product as a whole. It's just the pricing that worries everyone. There's the competition to consider. If others can offer better pricing, I believe we would probably consider deploying it instead.

That said, overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The best advice I can offer is to make sure to understand the rules and how they work as that was a bit of an issue for us in the first few weeks when we worked out how to “fix” some of the issues (client time-outs, repeatedly being asked to log in) as they came up. Also, test everything before rolling out to production.

ForeScout provides some of the greatest visibility into network traffic, showing you exactly who is doing what, down to the port and protocol being used, capturing entire conversations between endpoints. It is a simply fantastic tool that provides network and security persons with the ability to throw up honeypots.

Absolutely go for it. I would love to give them a demo of our own environment, talk to people at CounterACT and roll it out. If it's within their budget, whatever that may be, absolutely I would use it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I have installed the solution for two customers. For one, I have used the CounterACT CT 1000. In another environment, I did a more complex installation and I have used the appliances and management in a tray.

Forescout is a very good company that delivers very good features. I love it. I'd rate it nine out of ten.

Go for it.

I think it is a good product and definitely fills the gap. I don't think we have many competitors at this stage. The major competitor is Cisco, but the biggest advantage of CounterACT is vendor agnostic. It means that it can work with a variety of different products. That is the biggest advantage.

They also offer a monitoring service which is a good value if you do not have someone in house to monitor ForeScout on site. This can be full or part time. ForeScout is a powerful network access control tool that has some features found in insider threat solutions, though it is not exactly made for that.

Forescout Platform has the NAC solution and it is necessary to deployment. It's not exactly the same, but it can save some money rather than using another approach for NAC.

I rate Forescout Platform an eight out of ten.

My advice for someone looking to implement the Forescout Platform, it is a product that tells you what are the devices connecting your network. Without installing agents or without doing manual work, you can automatically know the inventory of your devices in your organization.  It's a very good feature that you can discover all devices connected to the network, such as printers or iPhones. You do not need to categorize the devices or find the MAC address of the devices connected on the remote side.

I rate Forescout Platform a nine out of ten.

If the price was cheaper then I would rate the solution a ten.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the systems control and security features could be better.

Forescout is better for smaller organizations in sectors like education or hospitality. I would rate Forescout as five out of ten.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I recommend doing a compression demo. If people use it, they will buy it. So they have to see the product in place. That's the main recommendation is to do a proof of concept. If they do, they will buy it. 

I would rate Forscout Device Visibility and Control Platform at a nine out of ten.

ForeScout CounterACT is like a Pandora's box, which contains a lot of functionalities that can be used to improve the customer's daily operation tasks and reduces manual workforce. It is recommended that the implementer understand what CounterACT can be used to do as different customers' business functions could use different functions of CounterACT.

I'm basically focusing on the product line right now. It's pretty good. The nice thing about it is that at last, we have a kind of software that's very easy to work with.

While most people in most of the cases do not want to go for Mac, in the case of cybersecurity, I believe it is very important to do so. In enterprise cases, the common culture is the DYD. Organizations need to add some sort of network access control to prevent many issues.

I'd rate the solution itself eight out of ten overall. It's quite good, but it could always continue to improve.

I'd advise companies to ensure their teams are well trained in ForeScout before starting implementation of any kind. Those setting up and using the solution should have a basic background in networking. If users are comfortable with configuring, they can create processes for the environment. That way, it will be deployed properly.

Teams should also test the solution first before they launch so there won't be any surprises. If they need to make changes, they need to manage the process properly.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. If it was a bit less complex, I'd give it perfect marks.

If you are looking for a NAC solution which works without the use of agents, I would say ForeScout is the one to go for.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10. I'm not sure about the OT side, but the visibility, control, orchestration, dashboard, and reporting are all good.

My advice is that you really need to understand the prerequisites of the use cases if you want to deploy the solution. You should also understand what kind of services they should open and the security rules—a firewall. They should have a clear understanding of how it is being designed and the architecture. If you know, it's easy for deployment, otherwise you will get stuck.

On a scale of one to ten I would give Forescout Platform a nine.

I would rate the Forescout Device and Visibility Control Platform at a six out of ten.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten because it's the best solution. 

I would advise someone considering this or a similar solution to make sure that the solution works with a lot of vendors. Choose a product that doesn't change your environment.

Maybe test the configuration very well before enabling actions (like VLAN moving, Captive Portal), because they can cause many problems in production environments if there are configuration mistakes.

Have a clear understanding and document the network architecture before you deploy it.

Do your homework ahead of time. Ensure that you have up-to-date network maps and that understand your network's architecture.

To get the best out of the solution, the organization’s networks team must be willing to take ownership and provide assistance where required. Use tools like Gigamon during deployment and avoid spanning directly from Cisco switches.

You can go ahead, but you will need good network skills to get the maximum benefits from it.

I would also advise that you don't activate all the add-on features, but use it solely for its primary function - visibility and rogue detection/blocking.