Fortinet FortiClient Reviews

There are multiple use cases for different customers. 

It has a very easy-to-use interface. It has ease of management, and all the modules are there. SKUs are also easily identifiable. 

Whatever is required in the firewall is already there in it. It's very advanced, and analytics reporting is very good. They also have cloud reporting. You get all the services that are available for your device in the cloud. You just have to subscribe. It's very easy.

There's a lot of demand for this solution because it's an all-in-one solution. The throughput is very high.

The only thing that is lacking in this product is the support. Their support can be improved.

I have been using Fortinet FortiClient for almost ten years. 

The stability of Fortinet FortiClient is very good.

The scalability of Fortinet FortiClient is very good. In my organization, around 300 people are using it. We also have mobile users who are connecting over 4G technology or, basically, over wireless technology to the devices and resources on the internal network. It's pretty good and robust.

It integrates very well into any IT infrastructure. They've come up with a lot of tools or different service modules that are able to talk to other technologies. So, you have an open architecture where they get a lot of information or security feeds from different providers. That's how they make their product more robust and scalable.

Their support is very bad. The product is good, but the support is very bad. Their support should be on par with the product. 

They are too lazy to answer the calls, They do not take the calls immediately. Even if you have subscribed for 24/7, 365 days support, they will give you a call only after 24 to 48 hours. There is a lag in their response time.

The initial setup was straightforward. It is very easy to set up. Even a person who does not know anything about firewalls will be able to set it up.

Deployment depends upon the strategy the customer requires. The setup can be complicated, but usually, it is straightforward. The implementation of a FortiGate firewall, usually, does not take more than three days. If you ensure that all the security policies are there and everything is there, it usually takes three days.

The cost per port is very less as compared to the other technologies.

I have deployed FortiGate's FortiAnalyzer, FortiMail for a lot of customers to replace their existing legacy-based firewalls such as Cisco ASA or Cisco PIX, SonicWall, FiberHome, Sophos, etc. We are replacing these technologies with FortiGate.

If you want to know the product, or if you do not want to rely on the support, then you have to master the product. Basically, you should know in and out of the product, and you should have extensive knowledge about it. You'll get that knowledge only by working, provided you have the right tools to understand. I learned this tool by using it and going through the knowledge base. They have a knowledge base website, which has almost everything. You just need to apply a little bit of logic to understand what it is. I did not use technical support for help.

We don't require anything extra because it has everything that is needed for current infrastructures. Whether it is the cloud infrastructure or the on-premises infrastructure, they have got everything inside it. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I am a senior Network and Security Solution architect and having certifications, like JNCIE-SP, JNCIP-Sec, JNCDA, Fortinet certified, Sophos Certified Engineer, and certified in ethical hacking v10. with hands-on experience of Tele 3G, 4G, Metro Ethernet, IGW, and large Data Center Design. my primary focus is to recommend cost-effective solutions, to save End customer CAPEX & OPEX.

Comprehensive protection and user visibility when using FortiGate Firewall with FortiClient.

Right now, my opinion is that FortiClient is very inexpensive for what it is. They have a very feature-rich product available in the UTP (Unified Threat Protection) bundle when compared to what other vendors offered Endpoint. Other vendors sell different parts of their security solutions in different pieces, but Fortinet sells all the features like a unified solution in one UTP bundle. For example, they included limited WAF (Web Application Firewall) features, load balancing, SD Wan (a very important feature), cloud sandbox, antivirus, anti-spam, web filtering, IPS protection, and Remote VPN including SSL VPN. All of this is included in the one UTM bundle.

If we compare with other products like Cisco, Juniper, Sophos, and Palo Alto, those companies require separate purchases for all the different features. So this is why I consider Fortinet very inexpensive. But it is also not a sacrifice because even with low cost for what you get, their security rating is very high. Many customers right now in the situation caused by the pandemic are having budget issues. These companies have lower budgets right now and they have to be aware of the value. They still have the same security need and they want a very feature-rich solution. Fortinet fits in their budget and that is why customers prefer to buying Fortinet as compared to other solutions.

The improvement required for Fortinet is that they must increase RAM in low-end Firewalls. because low-end Firewalls come with very low RAM, due to low RAM users faced performance issues when increase user traffic, that can cause performance issues. even we know other vendors are using a minimum of 04 GB RAM. But Fortinet for their low-end entry-level box is using only one/two GB RAM. That is very low and can be a performance issue.

If we compare the performance based on their datasheet, it does not really meet the full requirements. For example, if we are using the FG-60F Network Security Firewall 10xGE, the throughput is 10 gigs. But the memory is two GB. Two GB of memory is too low to handle the throughput. So they should increase the memory in the box. Fortinet can gain end customer confidence.

I have been working with Fortinet products and FortiClient for five years.  

FortiClient is stable as per my experience with multiple clients. Right now, we have installed the FortiClient internally as well. It is protecting our network as well so we are not only resellers. We do not experience any issues with the endpoint security.  

Fortinet technical support requires a little bit of effort to improve their services. The level of services is based on the customer's purchased support bundle. So if a customer purchases a 360 support bundle, then the customer can contact directly at a higher level with the technical support team. But if the customer purchases the normal 24/7 bundle and they try to open a ticket and make a case for service — either on a call or using the websites — your customer can open only a maximum P3 (Third Priority) level case. This is a low level of priority and it is not suitable for more serious problems. My experience with Cisco and Juniper is different. Those companies have an excellent way of dealing with support cases and they are very skilled. A customer can open a P1 case via phone immediately. With Fortinet, if you want to open a P1 case, you can not do it that way with a standard support package. Support for FortiClient needs to be more in line with the severity of the case.  

I previously worked with Kaspersky and Sophos Intercept X products. I used both as endpoint security.

The main difference is the advantage of FortiClient in CAPEX cost and feature-richness.

One problem I faced was when a customer went to renew FortiClient for their second Year, in Fortinet SKU is the same as a new purchase.

even other venders having renewed SKU for next year.

The case was really more like an upgrade than an initial purchase and should have been somehow included as a bundle. If we compare that with Intercept X and Kaspersky, those companies give the option to renew in similar cases and the renewal pricing is very low compared to the initial cost. It is maybe a place where the Fortinet pricing structure could be modified to appear more competitive.

As per my experience, Fortinet has the simplest way of making deployments compared to other products and companies like Sophos. It is very simple and predictable. Just follow the simple steps and — one, two, three — the firewall is ready to deploy. So you do not need to get more experience and you do not need to study up too much documentation or courses to determine how to configure it. All the information you need is available for free. The customer does not need a technical expert to configure and operate Fortinet products. But if the customer wants to configure competing products like Juniper, Cisco, Palo Alto, and Sophos, they need the technical knowledge to configure the products to achieve proper functionality.  

FortiClient is very simple and user-friendly. The GUI is very user friendly and it is the simplest GUI compared to other vendor products. This is another plus point for Fortinet.  

Clients need not only to look at the price of the product as a bottom line. Some products offer more as a package, as Fortinet does in this case. Some customers see only dollar signs when there is more to evaluating the value of a product offering than the only cost.

My advice to Fortinet is that they should make a change to FortiClient pricing. They should have a renewal price that is lower than the new purchase price. They should include the price bundle as a renewal price, like say you were purchasing UTM (Unified Threat Management) next year for support. They should include a renewal process in their pricing scheme, and not just treat all purchasing as a new contract.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate FortiClient as an eight-out-of-ten.  

Fortinet FortiClient is not disruptive, and its interface is great. It has an in-built VPN, which is very useful.

There isn't much to improve in terms of features and comparison with other vendors. It just needs to stay more up to date in catching the malware. 

The user interface may be improved, which would be a minor enhancement. Unlike central management, in endpoint security, the end users don't need to keep looking at the endpoint user interface. The technology is the most important thing in endpoint security. 

I have been using this solution for over ten years. 

Fortinet FortiClient is very good in terms of stability.

I don't find any problem at all. I can have one user or ten users. Scalability pretty much remains the same.

I never had to call their support. 

I used to use Trend Micro, and it is pretty good. I have also used McAfee and a few different ones. McAfee is probably the worst in my opinion. It is very disruptive. 

Both Trend Micro and Fortinet FortiClient are non-disruptive. They are pretty much like Microsoft Essential. Once you set them up, you never bother with the user interface. The interface stays in the background and does not interrupt the daily work.

Fortinet has acquired a company called enSilo, which is into EDR. As a result, Fortinet basically has EPP as well as EDR. Generally, a lot of EPPs cannot coexist, but Fortinet EPP and EDR can coexist, so that's a plus.

I would rate Fortinet FortiClient a nine out of ten. It's very popular and easy to use. That's why I have stayed with Fortinet FortiClient for ten years.

The primary use case of this solution is as a firewall. 

I have two Fortinet perimeter firewall boxes in my local data center. The two boxes also provide the SSL VPN functionalities, intended for authorized users only. Not everyone in my organization has access.

The most valuable features of FortiClient are that it can be integrated with Active Directory to the central authentication and that I can manage the permissions.

When the user gets authenticated, I can assign a different VPN or network to each user.

It's a  good solution for the IT department to control the access permission. I find this quite useful.

I think that FortiClient can enhance the multifactor authentication. Currently, if you want to enable dynamic tokens with FortiClient authentication, you only have one option, which is supplied by Fortinet.

You cannot integrate FortiClient VPN with Google authenticator or Microsoft authenticator, it's impossible. I think that they can improve this module.

In the next release of this solution, if they could improve the MFA, it would be a perfect solution.

I have been using this solution since March of 2018, almost two and a half years. 

We are always using the latest version, as they regularly update their software.

It's quite stable.

They say that it can support more than 1,000 concurrent users, so I would agree that it is scalable. We have 800 users.

Because we have only authorized certain people to use it, it is restricted to the IT department. This has less than ten people in other departments. There is a total of approximately 20 people who maintain this solution.

I have used several solutions. Previously, I worked with Cisco AnyConnect Access VPN and also Pulse VPN, which is originated by Juniper.

We use these other solutions to access other organizations. It is not a decision to switch. These other solutions have been provided by previous employers.

The initial setup is very easy and quite straightforward.

If you are an experienced network engineer then you can easily configure that to a VPN feature in less than half an hour.

FortiClient is quite reasonably priced. 

You can get the firewall box rather than just the SSL VPN box. When you purchase extra hardware, you are not restricted in the number of end users. 

This compares favorably to other solutions such as Cisco AnyConnects or Pulse VPN, where you have to pay extra for the end-user license and it gets quite expensive.

If you are thinking to adopt the Fortinet SSL VPN, you have to consider the security level, because, by default, FortiClients can only integrate with FortiToken with a very limited license that will give you two. You can purchase additional FortiToken licenses for the MFA, or you can change to another solution, or the final option is to have the security level compromised, where the users just have user passwords to get authenticated.

If users share their password with other users then the account is compromised. You cannot use multifactor authentication to prevent or to mitigate that risk. If you choose to use FortiClient you have to consider that feature.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use Fortinet FortiClient across various scenarios to enhance security.

What I find valuable in FortiClient is its patch management capabilities, allowing remote updates efficiently. Additionally, the integration with FortiNAC and FortiGate servers is advantageous for a holistic security approach. The suite's ability to log and report information is user-friendly and effective.

One area for improvement in FortiClient is the speed of connectivity. 

I have been using Fortinet FortiClient for ten years.

Fortinet FortiClient is highly scalable. It can easily handle a significant increase in users, and the scalability is practically seamless. In my company, we currently have around 10,000 users.

Setting up Fortinet FortiClient is straightforward and user-friendly. The app is easily accessible online, and configuring it is a breeze. For enterprise use, FortiManager streamlines infrastructure management with intuitive blade screens. Deployment involves parallel migration, allowing testing of functionalities before a full transition. The process is efficient, and even for firewall installations, it is manageable with minimal disruption.

Fortinet FortiClient offers a free version, especially if you only need the VPN service. However, licenses are required for additional features. If you want to use endpoint services for network perimeter control or implement OTP, there are specific licenses for those. The free solution covers basic needs, while licenses are needed for advanced functionalities.

Our main use case is when I need to work from home. For instance, if I'm not going to the office today and I need to access files hosted on our local servers, I use FortiClient to connect to the network. This also helps me avoid using virtual machines that are located on-premises. So, my primary use case is accessing the network remotely via VPN to work with VMs. However, I'm not responsible for the overall management; that's handled by our IT team.

Almost every VPN solution offers similar features. You input your credentials, log in, and gain access to a virtual IT environment assigned to you. This is the core functionality of a VPN, and we have that with FortiClient. Personally, it's fine for me.

While it's been excellent, I suppose even faster connectivity would be great.

More integration would be beneficial. Faster connectivity is always welcome.

I have been using this solution for three years. We use the latest version. 

From my perspective as an end user, it's consistently stable, and I would rate the stability as a nine out of ten.

It's not designed for scalability; it's a VPN solution meant for individual users.

FortiClient was pre-installed on my machine.  It is deployed both on-premises and cloud environments. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten because it has been very stable for me.

I use the tool to connect server to an ISP Data Center. 

The product's performance and pricing could be better. 

I am using the product for three to four months. 

The product's connections drop all the time. 

The tool is scalable. We have four users in the company for the product. 

The solution's initial setup is straightforward. The product's deployment tool 20-30 minutes to complete. 

The solution is not worth the investment. 

The product's licensing is yearly and expensive. 

I would rate the product a five out of ten. We plan to discard the product and use OpenVPN. I wouldn't recommend this product to other users. 

The primary use of Fortinet FortiClient is to protect endpoint devices against various types of cyber threats, such as viruses, trojans, spyware, and phishing attacks. It also helps to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive data and networks and can be used to control access to specific applications and websites.

In addition to endpoint protection, FortiClient can also be used to create secure VPN connections to enable remote access to company resources like Jira, code repositories, corporate Wiki, etc. 

It has a horrible performance. It is one of the most unstable VPNs I have ever used. 

Since the project was pushed to use, many employees complained about its instability. 

Sure, it has some advanced features, and it is not fair to evaluate it as a VPN only. Unfortunately, the company policies bring most of the resources through protection, and without the VPN, you will be simply blocked. 

Therefore, we are paying so much attention to it. With a slow or unstable internet connection, Fortinet becomes a nightmare. I personally numerous times printed tasks from Jira to PDF for other employees due to VPN issues.

The solution is easy to configure and manage.

It is designed to bring additional safety to the machine (it is hard to uninstall by an ordinal user, and it has an in-built web filter). However, implementation is far behind industry standards. 

For instance, the Web filter is a component that provides protection against web-based threats by blocking access to malicious or inappropriate websites. It might bring additional safety. However, in the real world, it constantly produces:

1. False Positives, which can result in legitimate websites being blocked. This can be frustrating for end-users and potentially impact their productivity.
2. FortiClient's Web filter may also over-block certain websites, even if they are not malicious or inappropriate. This could result in users being unable to access legitimate websites that are important for their work, causing delays or disruptions.

The solution needs network stability, especially when the internet connection is not stable. 

Forticlient should provide proper polling functionality to try to keep the session alive by all possible means. We have seen certain improvements over the past year. However, it is simply not enough to be treated as a good yet even acceptable tool to use. It is currently producing more issues than adds value.

The web filter quite often blocks random sites, including online dictionaries, governmental sites, etc. Review of the wrong block reports simply doesn't work. 

I've used the solution for around a year.

The solution is not stable enough.

The solution offers a weak performance.

After the merger, our project was forced to use Forticlient.

I know nothing about pricing.

We had no options to choose from.

If your employees might have a weak internet connection (for instance, mobile) think twice before choosing this configuration. If you decide to have FortiClient, never use the WebFilter component. Even Microsoft analog works better (if you really need it).