"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"Secure and easy connect is the most valuable feature. It is a reliable solution, and it works."
"The initial setup is easy. Our clients use the FortiClient EMS, which is the central console for installing FortiClient. It is easy and very user friendly."
"What I like most about FortiClient is that it's easy to use. The way it displays information is very straightforward."
"The ability to reroute traffic from the user, connecting you to the internet rather than passing through our network area, is very useful."
"We find the VPN features valuable."
"The most valuable features are malware detection, integrates well with other solutions, and ease of use for all users."
"It is a fantastic product. Its overall security is valuable. We are very impressed with the web filtering and the application firewall it provides."
"It seems to be more scalable than we thought."
"Version 9.1 has been an improvement on previous versions. It's a good solution for SMB."
"Fortinet FortiNAC is both scalable and stable."
"Fortinet FortiNAC is a stable solution."
"There are some features that are working well."
"Fortinet FortiNAC has good user account customization."
"The network segmentation is the most important part of the solution. The integration with the Zero Trust Access solution is a crucial part of segmenting your network."
"The users say that FortiNAC is configurable and easy to use."
"It's easy to connect to a VPN without any hassles."
"In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"The documentation could be improved."
"I think that FortiClient can enhance the multifactor authentication."
"While I cannot think of new features to add, it would be nice if the reports were improved, to have these sent automatically."
"The only thing that is lacking in this product is the support. Their support can be improved."
"The software inventory part is not yet up-to-date. It doesn't have a great interface, which is a disadvantage. I wish we could leverage it, but we don't use it at all because it's not that reliable."
"In the next release, I would like to see an additional layer of security added."
"One area that could be improved is cost, but you've got to pay for what you get."
"I would like for the next release to be more user-friendly for users to do not have as much of a technical background."
"The deployment of Fortinet FortiNAC could be better. When we are deploying the solution we have some level of dependencies with other vendors for their connection to Fortinet FortiNAC. Without these dependencies, it would be better."
"We have some stability issues with the solution, the network drops out too often."
"There could be better integration with legacy equipment. It integrates perfectly with all Fortinet solutions, but if you look at other third-party integrations—not on the networking part; but more on the security infrastructure part—it's more limited."
"Classifications and visibility need to be improved a lot. They have to start work on being agentless. Agentless means they need to have strong integration with Windows."
"Integration is hard in Fortinet FortiNAC, but they are evolving and getting better. For example, with Cisco, Aruba, Huawei, and Extreme devices, Fortinet FortiNAC is working properly, but some other devices have problems."
"The GUI is a little bit strange — different than other Fortinet products."
"They need to change or upgrade the technology in the product."
"FortiNAC could be more scalable."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 33 reviews while Fortinet FortiNAC is ranked 4th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 8 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiNAC is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Provides good endpoint security at low price". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiNAC writes "Account customization, multiple languages available, and effective device blocking". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Fortinet FortiNAC is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, Portnox CORE and macmon Network Access Control. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Fortinet FortiNAC report.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) 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.
