Fortinet FortiGate Reviews

We are a managed services company, and we are also a partner with Fortinet and Cisco Meraki. The firmware that I just started using is 6.4.4. Most of the FortiGates that I sell are 60E and 60F. For some of our larger customers, I have got a handful of FortiGate 80, 100, and 200.

Fundamentally, its primary purpose is security at the edge of the network. I have got some clients who are starting to use the SD-WAN feature for a multi-location setup. I have got other clients who are using a lot of IPSec tunnels. I also have some clients who, with the increase in remote workers, are taking advantage of the FortiClient product that ties in. They are using that for remote VPN connections. 

We are a managed services provider, and I would say that it has improved the way our client's organization functions. I would also hope that it is seamless for them. They don't even know it. The biggest improvement for us is that it allows us to do more with a smaller staff.

One of the nice things about FortiGate is that it can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises. You can actually do both. That's the biggest reason why I stick with this solution as opposed to something like Cisco Meraki. Another nice thing is that I can log directly into a FortiGate or get to it through their FortiCloud access products. They're pretty reliable and consistent.

One of the reasons why I started using the product was their single pane of management. I can deploy their line of firewalls in conjunction with their switching and access points, and I can manage the entire network from one interface. I don't have to log into one interface for the firewall, another one for the access points, and another one for the switches. These firewalls have access point controller functionality built right into the system, so I don't even have to purchase additional devices to manage them.

FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works.

Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware.

The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack.

I have been using this solution since 2007.

If you have the firmware version 6.4.3 and are using FortiLink in VLAN, it has trouble with tunneling networks for a wireless network. It won't give it a route to the internet. I found it just last week. There was a version back in 6.2 where it required 12 characters for the password of a wireless network on Web 2.0 as opposed to the traditional eight characters. The problem came when you wanted to edit it. If you upgraded to that firmware from a previous version, it wouldn't let you save any changes without changing the password, making it a requirement. That was kind of problematic for a while, but for the most part, it has been pretty stable and responsive.

It is easy to scale as long as you start with the right firewall. Our clients are of different sizes. We have clients with the home office with two or three employees. One of the clients has about 26 locations in all four time zones and about 400 employees.

I haven't used their official tech support, which is actually a good thing. The reason I haven't used their official tech support is that they have a support mechanism in place. I have direct access to a local sales engineer, and when I have problems, I call him up on the cell phone. Based on that, they definitely support their partners 100%. They are definitely channel driven, and it shows.

I have deployed SonicWall, WatchGuard, Cisco ASA, Rockies, and Palo Alto. The biggest reason I went with Fortinet is that it felt like it has got Palo Alto type of functionality at a much more reasonable price point.

I spent seven years working at the state level education, and budgets were tough. We had SonicWall subscription services. I could replace them with the brand new FortiGate with a three-year subscription for the same cost. That really changed things. The single pane of management that they have was just the frosting on the cake.

It is pretty simple. For example, I just set up a new network with a 100E, and I have got four stackable switches. It will run a network with 23 access points. I set up all the VLANs, routing, rules, and other things. It won't take more than four hours of work. I am getting ready to box up and ship it out. It will be plug and play once it gets to the site.

Take the training. They've got free training that is available online, and there are different levels for technical training. It is crucial. If you sign up as a partner, which doesn't cost you anything, the training is free. If you want to go for the test and get certified, you got to pay for the test, but the actual training materials are available to every partner for free. I would say that definitely take advantage of those. When you have new employees as network engineers, make this training a part of the routine.

I would rate Fortinet FortiGate an eight out of ten. I have been using it for years, and I do try to evaluate it on a regular basis and continue to stick with them. I just don't have a lot of bad things to say about them. Aside from their product, I'm a also fan of their company and how they do business, which makes it easier to do business with them. I don't necessarily appreciate the business practices of some of their competitors. It is nice not to have to worry about that.

I specify, configure and deploy firewalls  in organizations with 500 or fewer employees and 15 or fewer sites.  Primarily I choose between Cisco, Sonicwall and Fortigate small and medium sized appliances.  Occasionally I deploy virtual appliances in AWS.   I prefer to use Fortigate firewalls for several reasons- remote access is simple and the included client works with MacOS Windows and IOS devices.  The level of security works well for most clients and the authentication with AD/LDAP makes the solution easier to deploy.  I also find that the clients  appreciate the lower price point than other vendors.

We have a standard build. We give the client the laptop, and, especially with the pandemic, we send them home with the laptop or FedEx the laptop already configured, and the user is ready to go. 

I don't even need to know the client's password. I can just install the software and create a profile. The client fills the profile in with simple instructions, types in their password instructions, and connects it and they're good. It's really simple. 

That's why we have standardized recommending Fortinet. That doesn't mean that I don't support other solutions as well, however, the device that I like the best is the one that's easy to use for me and it's easy to use for the clients. The price point is not bad as well.

The ease of setting the solution up is a valuable aspect for us.

The most valuable aspect that differentiates it from other solutions is that the client (the SSL VPN client or the IP sec VPN client, the same clients) is included in the solution. We don't have to pay extra for the software and the clients. 

I have had some issues, but no more than others and I don't have to buy an expensive add-on license to do it and it's managed and it's updated automatically. That's the key thing, that the client is included and it updates itself so I don't have to do too much to manage it and it's very transparent to the end-user.

The biggest "gotcha" is that if the client purchases what they call the UTM shared bundle, which has unified threat management on both, it's not as easy to manage if you have more than one firewall. 

If I wanted a unified console, I have to pay extra. And that's the downfall. That's the only needed improvement that I would say for the Fortinet solution, is that they should have it web-based from the get-go. You should not have to buy an extra bundle or an extra device.

If I have to make an update to a web filter, and I have 12 devices, I've got to do it in 12 places. If I don't want to do that the client can pay for a pretty expensive device or virtual appliance that does that for them. It's like an expensive centralized management tool. That's the big downfall of Fortinet. It doesn't come included, you have to pay for it. Their web-based one, that's sort of just like an inventory manager. It's not really good for distributing roles. With Cisco, you don't have to do anything. The one from Aruba HD has one too. Fortinet should try to be similar to those options.

In the next release, it would be amazing if they could give a better tool for upgrading, so that if I upgrade from an older version to the other, it can read the configuration and processes it for me so that I don't have to rewrite it from scratch. In FortiConverter, they have a tool like this, however, it doesn't work well. It's really more for bringing items in from other vendors, not from one version to the other.

That was my last experience where they operated from version five to six. However, that's really the only big thing. The main thing is to include the FortiManager cloud software like Cisco does. To have one solution. If you paid $150 a year for the support, you might as well get that too so I could manage all the devices at one spot. They do have FortiCloud, however, it's not the same as the way Cisco does it. They are selling another product called FortiManager. FortiManager should be included with the support, and that would make it more of a business solution, rather than a feature request.

I would say that I have been using the solution for over 10 years. It's likely been between 10 and 15 years at this point.

Fortigate firewalls are very reliable- in the past 15 years I believe only 2 devices in a 100 have failed.  The failures were due to harsh environments (dust and water will ruin any electronic device).  The input I can give to any technology person or client looking to choose a firewall / threat management device I would highly recommend the stability / reliability of fortigate.  Once installed it will do it's job efficiently and effectively for several years.

I will tell a client not to go with Fortinet if they have no firewall or they have a very, very old firewall. If this is from scratch, I'd say let's not go with Fortinet, let's go with Meraki if you have the money. I always say create the budget for it if you have a lot of sites, as Cisco does a better job if you have a lot of sites. If you have two sites, then it's fine to go with Fortinet. It'll scale to that scale. However, if you want to go over a couple of sites, it's not the best option.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward. It's actually gotten better. I got good at doing it from scratch from the command line, or even from the GUI with all the 50 steps to set up stuff. However, now they're wizards and it's much better. It was the thing that probably a lot of people commented on initially, and they just worked hard to fix it. They updated the software from version four to five to six. They did a good job at making it easier.

If the client had a lot of downtime or a lot of issues with older equipment, or they did not like the fact that they had to pay every year just to be able to use the device, then the return on investment of spending $900 for a Fortinet 60E per site for a three-year contract will hands-down beat pretty much anybody. 

It is definitely set it and forget it. There's very little input. You'll save money on consulting. If you were to call me and you're doing Juniper or you're doing Palo Alto, there's a lot more configuring and it's a lot harder to add stuff and therefore, as a consultant, I make more money, and I'm being serious. Once I set up a Fortinet I really don't have to touch it for years.

Maybe I have to log in to check that I need to do an update, however, in that case, they usually send me an email saying hey, your license key is up and maybe you want to buy a new one. I take the old one out and put a new one in, that's when I get paid again. It's boiled down to that. 

I'm not only an authorized reseller. I am a consultant that uses their equipment and recommends them on a routine basis. I am not a Fortinet partner, however.

I use a series of FortiGate products, including the 60, the 90, and the 100. Some of them are E's, some of them are S's; it all depends. However, they have pretty much the same user interface.

If a company is considering the solution, I'd advise that they consider purchasing the FortiManager if they really like the feature set and the way that Fortinet works. For example, a company we work with has these large scale solutions, and they use FortiManager. If you're a very large implementation, definitely look into Fortinet. If you're small, for example, under 20 devices, consider joining Cisco Meraki as it's so much easier. That's what I would tell any client. 

FortiManager and FortiGate are really good. If you like the way the GUI works it's more flexible than Cisco. There are more bells and whistles, however, Cisco is going to be the way to do it if you're going to do 50 sites. If you were to do a lot of sites, consider Cisco. If not, you can do Fortinet.

At the end of the day, the solution is very flexible, and if the client has special business partners that want a special type of nailed up VPN or special configuration for the clients, it offers that. The lesson I learned using the solution was to go with the solution that's most flexible for the client and at the same time is as low touch as possible. That's why I've standardized on FortiGate, as it's low touch for me and I'd rather spend time fixing other stuff or troubleshooting the other problems for clients than this particular solution.

You want to spend less time fighting with your remote access solution or your firewall solution and work on other problems. It should not be a difficult thing, and yet, a lot of people struggle with that. Especially today with the pandemic, they have to be able to have access to their stuff and that's crucial. That's the biggest takeaway. Is it easy to manage it, is it easy to connect? If so, it's worth the investment.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. If they included FortiManager in their offering, I'd give the product a perfect ten.

We primarily use the solution as a firewall.

We use the firewall to enforce our company ideologies and principles and policies. The solution has built-in features for web filtering that are great. It categorizes it nicely for you. 

The interface itself is nice to work with. It's a lot better than the initial interface that they used to have around version four. I used to work for FortiGate some time back, and the earlier interfaces were not as good as these latest ones. 

I like that once you open it up, you have a dashboard that can give you a holistic overview of what is happening. You can see, for example, how your resources are doing on your firewall or if you still have disc space for logs and so forth.

The solution gives you an immediate view of what's happening on the hardware itself. What we have done with FortiGate is we have put up a FortiAnalyzer, a FortiGate reporting hardware. We are using it in conjunction with FortiGate. 

The solution offers good reporting. We get our reports from there. We have the opportunity to get real-time reports. 

There are great templates, so you don't have to customize them if you don't want to. You do have the option to custom create some folders and some reports, however, with what is there, you don't really need to go through extra effort, as they already give you a lot of predefined views of reports and so forth.

We have access to quite a few features. The web filter and application control are primarily what we are using. Then we also have a VPN feature, which allows for our remote users to connect and get through the firewall. 

The commercial side of things can be improved a bit. They have such a good product, and when you disable some features, it has to be commercialized for you to enjoy those features. Therefore, you are actually buying half a product. You have hardware there, and yet, your features are not enabled. The primary things, such as the antivirus, web filter, DNS filter, application intrusion, file filter, and email filter come with the general license. There are other things that you want to also enjoy in this system and you can't. 

There are SD-WAN network monitoring, SD-WAN features, Industrial Databases, Internet of Things, Detection, etc., however, we do have not licenses for those features. We thought that if you bought a product, you should have all of the features it offers. Why should you need to make so many extra purchases to enable features? They should have one price for the entire offering. That's one of the drawbacks they could look at. 

Sometimes the firmware automatically updates itself. Then it corrupts the configuration and you have to roll back or you have to do amendments to the configurations. That, however, has happened only once with us. We have put in controls for automatic updates to stop them and now we do manual allowance or we allow the manual update.

Most of the features are good. They give you pricing and you get a VPN for about 10 users where you can test it. For us, we feel that we need to buy extra licenses due to COVID, as people are working from home. Under the current conditions, we are not getting the best out of the firewall. 

They could just maybe put better graphics or better reporting into the solution. I want to know who is the user and what is the exact website they're visiting. Something like that would help. They should do more like what the GFI is doing.

We've been using the solution for a bit over a year now.

6.4.2 is our current version. The latest is 6.4.3. It's available like I say, however, we have not installed it. We'll wait until around December, then we will then install that one. We like to wait to witness its stability. Once we know it is bug-free, then we allow it to run as the latest platform.

We have a cluster and we have configured it with high availability. What we have done is we have put one primary and one secondary in case it breaks or it gets damaged. We have a third one at our DR site as well, which works in conjunction with Plateau. We have employed the same rules and some stricter rules on the DR site, just to allow traffic between these machines.

We allow certain times for updates on the infrastructure we have at the DR. We are planning some more, however, we don't enjoy all the features yet. We want to bring in an SD-WAN. Maybe that can also help us with scaling our network at different angles and from the cloud or being from an LD device or so forth. We're still working on that.

We have a partner that we work with. We have support at another level and I'm the primary person that looks after the firewall. If I have an issue that is urgent and I don't have the time to do the knowledge base to actually turn it around, we usually engage our partner, which has engineers that have the knowledge necessary to deal with it and who are certified in FortiGate. 

We have what is called FortiCare. We have FortiCare support as well for firmware and general updates and all those other things. I normally do updates and so forth myself. It's very little intervention from outside technical support.

Having background knowledge, the initial implementation was not really complex for me. You just need to know your environment and what is needed as well as what is allowed. 

The business input was the only item outstanding as there were issues such as who needs to have social media access at what time and who needs to have full access. Those were business decisions, however, but from the technical side, it was fairly easy.

They have almost all the features embedded in the solution. It's just that some features are not available because you have to pay for it. There are lots of add-ons available, and you need to pay extra for them, so pricing can add up.

We are strictly a government entity. We are a customer.

The model that we are using is the 500E, which is for small and medium enterprises. We are not a big institution. We do not have the latest version. We like to wait about three months before we apply anything new to make sure the early releases aren't flawed. After three months, after we've got a good review, then we will say, "Okay, let's upgrade to that version."

Even though we feel that sometimes they create a new version to take care of a vulnerability or threat, we like to be safe and avoid bugs. The version that we are fitting currently is 6.4.2, which is fairly stable.

Apart from the fact that they should just include everything in their offering, everything else works fine for me. There's a whole lot of Fortinet products that work together, FortiSwitches, FortiAP's, etc. Overall, I would give it eight of ten. 

I'm primarily using the solution for security purposes, and also for managing the network for various companies. I am deploying it for uniting management statuses, in order to be able to manage everything inside and to control security policies. It can fight against attacks to the system or for email searches. It is basically a central management security appliance.

We find it's good for managing the network and offers good defense against attacks.

Technical support is great. It's really fast.

Overall the solution is pretty user-friendly. It has a good dashboard and is pretty easy to navigate.

The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco.

The only thing is sometimes you have to learn with CLI. For those not familiar with CLI it can be an issue. It would be ideal if we could avoid using CLI. If you make a mistake in the command line, it's harder to detect. It would be much better if they had a user-friendly GUI.

The initial setup is complex.

I've been using the solution for five years.

The solution is very stable. You don't have to worry about bugs or glitches. I tend to wait and not upgrade to the latest version right away to ensure this is the case.

The solution is scalable. If you need to expand it, you can. We have it at a variety of networks and sites with no problem.

We have 120 users that are connected to a minimum of 80 computers and a minimum of 15 servers, which is great. The solution is working and it is still stable even across all of these devices and servers. We have multiple networks inside as well, so we are not only on one network. We set them separately, which is why the initial setup for us was quite complex. We're through with that though.

The technical support is pretty good. they're pretty knowledgeable and responsive, especially when you get to the Level 3 techs.

We previously used CheckPoint. Unfortunately, they didn't have a very good service, especially in technical support, and therefore we decided to switch.

For our organization, the initial setup was not straightforward. It was pretty complex. That's due to the fact that we had many networks to set up and many sites to take into account.

We set up the solution ourselves, although we did work closely with Fortinet as part of their bundle package.

The licensing is paid on a yearly basis.

I evaluated Palo Alto. They didn't have the complete solution we wanted. Neither did Juniper, which we also looked at. We looked into possible having Cisco, however, Cisco is too expensive. 

When we looked at Cisco, we also evaluated Meraki, which is a part of Cisco. It did not have what we needed either. 

We are using the 200E in our environment. We had 200D before.

We're not using the latest version of the solution, which is 6.4. I like to wait on new versions to see if it is stable before deploying it. I like to take my time and avoid headaches where possible.

I would recommend the product to other organizations. It's got great bundle options which make it a very good choice - and it's much cheaper than Cisco.

FortiGate is a popular firewall in Turkey due to its widespread use and strong performance. Technical experts can easily be found for FortiGate, which is very important. Almost every company uses FortiGate internally. FortiGate is user-friendly and reliable, offering good performance at a reasonable cost.

You can integrate certain other services with FortiGate and use additional threat intelligence services because they allow you to combine various solutions, enhancing your overall security.

FortiGate may include AI capabilities and integrate external threat intelligence. However, version management and backup/restore operations could be improved.

I have been using FortiGate Next-Generation Firewall as a reseller for 15 years.

With high availability, this FortiGate allows one device to take over for another seamlessly in case of failure.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

FortiGate is scalable because it supports various models that can accommodate different dimensions. It is suitable for all types of businesses.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The initial setup is easy. The firewall setup involves more than just physical installation and basic configurations. It includes customizing specific policies and configurations tailored to the customer's needs, which can take up to two or three days for a single firewall. This process is resource-intensive both in terms of cost and time.

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The product is cheap.

FortiGate Firewall offers advanced threat intelligence capabilities. It allows integration with various threat services, such as Cisco Talos. If you are a customer of both FortiGate and Cisco for threat intelligence, you can integrate Cisco Talos with FortiGate, which enhances security effectiveness through Intelligence.

I recommend FortiGate for every company. It's a highly effective solution that can significantly enhance firewall security. You can easily find technical guides to help you understand its capabilities. FortiGate is known for its reliability and robust features.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution in our network.

IPsec is valuable. Internet filters are valuable features. The solution is secure. The VPN is good.

The performance can be improved.

The tool is stable.

We have around 90 users.

We contacted support while we worked with IPsec. The support team helped us.

Positive

The deployment of IPsec took around 5 hours for 90 users.

The security provided by the product is our return on investment.

The tool is moderately priced. We pay $500 per year for the license.

Overall, I rate the product a ten out of ten.

We use the solution for security.

It is a good solution. The product is stable and strong. We never had any issues with it. All the features work perfectly.

The product’s price is high. It is charging more compared to other solutions.

I have been working with the product for six to seven years. We are working with the latest version of the product.

The product is stable, so we have no complaints. I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten. We are an SME. We have around 300 users.

I have 20 years of experience in the industry. The initial setup is simple for me. We can deploy the solution within hours.

I rate the product’s pricing a six out of ten. We pay a yearly license fee.

We implement the solution for our clients. We never had to contact technical support. I recommend the solution to others. It is a good product. Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

My clients use it as a proxy. The second use case is to try a kind of web filtering. So that's the reason why they're buying. We have customers to whom we have sold an appliance, and we also have a customer to whom we have sold on a virtual machine. So, it's placed on their private cloud.

We've been able to try and secure our perimeter better because of the proxy and the gateway. Moreover, traffic from all our compliance actually passes through this. 

We have compliances also, so we get log reports from that, which goes into our log management software. And it actually helps us to try and analyze any security threats to our environment.

DNS security is something that is actually a good service that comes along with the FortiProXY or a Forti secure web gateway.

Fortinet FortiGate SWG is already a good solution, especially with its IP reputation and anti-botnet security features.

The UI/UX experience can be a little better.

My company has the skill set assets. 

We've been in the business for more than eight years. We have implemented FortiGate SWG in the last twelve months.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. It's very highly stable. Even if the appliance on-premise solutions have been working fine, Fortinet has a good RMA policy in case of failure as well.  

I would rate the scalability of this product a nine out of ten because it is highly scalable. We have not had problems with customers in terms of scalability.

For medium and enterprise businesses, we would be looking at a web gateway. Small businesses normally don't get into buying a web gateway as such.

We expect a little skillset from the partner as well. However, if we raise the ticket, it becomes much easier, and we get the necessary technical support.

Positive

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

Usually, the deployment model is in a private cloud.  It can be deployed as an on-prem solution also. The customers have proxy gateways, and so it comes as an appliance as well or as hardware. 

The deployment takes days. It doesn't take weeks. But it depends on the customer environment, like the number of users and what policies need to be configured for that. 

So, it depends on the complexity as far as configurations are concerned. But it definitely can be done in days, and it doesn't take more than ten odd days or so, depending upon the scope.

From a price standpoint, Fortinet is willing to work with partners to get good deals, and Forti will not lose on a price. 

So, we'll be able to try and have a good price versus performance metrics that Fortinet provides.

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I would definitely recommend using the solution.