"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"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 VPN connection is the feature that I like the most."
"The connection speed is fast. I can connect quickly at any time, and there are never any interruptions to the FortiClient connection. I could easily code into the client's server with that connection, with no lag."
"Overall Fortinet FortiClient has good functionality."
"The solution is stable, we have not had any issues in the time we have been using it."
"It seems to be more scalable than we thought."
"Fortinet FortiClient is not disruptive, and its interface is great. It has an in-built VPN, which is very useful."
"From Forticlient, the EMS, the central management is easy to use."
"It is a scalable product."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox is scalable."
"The scanner office document as well as PDF are useful. The most valuable thing is that you can emulate different operating systems without having the danger of getting something infected. It emulates several operating systems, and as a result, you either get the file or you don't get the file."
"The solution is easy to manage."
"Overall, it works fine. Its interface is also fine."
"The dynamic behavior analysis is excellent. We have many attacks caught by the FortiSandbox as zero-day attacks. Additionally, the administration is simple and can be customized to fit your companies needs."
"Compared to other solutions, it's easy to configure and implement because of the templates. The timing of scanning files is faster."
"Integration is one of the solution's most valuable aspects. You can integrate even third-party solutions so that they can send the information or files they quarantine through the FortiSandbox"
"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."
"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."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"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."
"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 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 greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"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."
"The user interface could be more inviting."
"In the next release, I would like to see an additional layer of security added."
"They have an EDR feature for end protection detection and response, and this is actually with an add-on subscription, which is charged separately. What I would like to see is this included with the base cost."
"The deployment status is not good in Mac devices and sometimes in Windows-based devices using GPO, like Active Directory, that are not on the local network."
"We do not use the solution every day and there are times when the new users have trouble reconnecting. The technology itself works but our users getting adopted to it is a major problem. Having the user adapt to the desktop landing page that it begins on is throwing them off a bit."
"I would like Fortinet to improve FortiClient's compatibility with macOS."
"It takes too long to install."
"If we can have more dashboards, it would be good."
"The initial setup is not too complex but could be easier."
"If you were to compare prices between vendors and manufacturers, you would see that the lowest equipment in the Sandbox line is quite expensive for a new customer."
"The reporting tools could be improved in Fortinet FortiSandbox."
"There could be more templates and a higher number of simulated VMs to configure more use cases. Sometimes we need to configure many use cases in many different environments, and if the number of VMs that we configure is limited, we have to remove some and reconfigure the environment if we need another environment."
"The use cases in Fortinet FortiSandbox are not good. It is difficult to upload a custom VM for Fortinet FortiSandbox. The integration of Fortinet FortiSandbox with other Fortinet or FortiGate firewalls is not good. VMs are already installed in the hardware and are working fine, but we tried to approve the custom VM many times but did not succeed."
"I don't know if it is viable to do an improvement like this. When there are passwords in the password-protected files, it can't scan them or do things like this. I don't know if an algorithm or something else could make it better. Nowadays, many legitimate office documents have passwords."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 33 reviews while Fortinet FortiSandbox is ranked 7th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 7 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Provides good endpoint security at low price". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSandbox writes "Good performance and integration capabilities with good technical support". 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 FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Check Point SandBlast Network, FireEye Network Security, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and McAfee Advanced Threat Defense. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Fortinet FortiSandbox 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.
