Fortinet FortiGate-VM Reviews

We primarily set up this solution with our large clients.

The solution offers good documentation.

I'm mostly happy with how the solution performs.

The solution works well for large companies. We use it for our bigger clients.

The interface of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's not the best.

In some areas of the solution, it works slowly.

I am currently using the solution. I've been using it for a while now.

We use a variety of different Fortinet solutions.

We deployed the solution locally, to our server.

The solution is FortiGate 60D and FortiGate-VM is FortiOS 5.2.2. I'm not sure which version of the solution we are currently on.

Our company exports this solution to large customers. We're partners with Fortinet.

We have the solution on a local server.

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

We are service providers, and we provide managed services to external customers.

The primary use case of this solution is for firewalling, web applications, and proxying.

We use all of the UTM (Unified Threat Management) features that come with this product.

The most valuable features of this solution are the integration within the environment, with centralized reporting. 

One analyzer and the different devices feeding into that environment. 

The firmware is always up-to-date.

Compatibility and integration with other products or vendors such as Cisco SD-WAN products need improvement.

The multi-tenancy environment for multiple customers, to make it more secure, needs some improvement.

When you buy a bigger box, you should have the ability to slice and dice data. It should also have the ability to give customers either read and write or more privileged access to that environment. Specifically, to the environment that doesn't overflow into the other parts that have been sliced up.

I would like to see a type of portal for on-site deployment, where they can report into a cloud portal and have a high-level view of utilization. Basic indicators on the performance of the environment, including health status, should be displayed.

I have been using this solution for approximately six years.

We are completely satisfied with the stability of this solution.

Because we're sitting on a multi-tenant type of setup the scalability will depend on the customer's ability to upgrade.

Externally we have several customers that range from government to enterprise clients that use the product and we manage the backend. 

The number of users can range from a site that has 100 users to a site that has 2,000 to 3,000 users.

With the multi-tenant environment, we are able to use resources from multiple accounts. 

We run a 24/7 operation with various requirements, and have a team of 15 to 20 to maintain this solution.

We have plans to increase the usage as the requirement increases for more secure environments with more advanced features or other features within the security space. We would go from a standard firewall to maybe a web application firewall, or to authentication with the two-factor type of services.

Technical support is good. We work through a distributor and it's just a matter of a phone call to explain what needs to be done or a feature that we need to enable, and within an hour or two they come back to explain what has to be done.

They also give advice going forward with what to deploy.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward.

The implementation varies from being complex to being straightforward. It can take two to three weeks to implement with some tweaking afterward.

Part of the implementations comes with professional services from Fortinet themselves. In most cases, if it's a new version or a new deployment, we typically get the implementation services from a service provider rather than the vendor.

We have clients with three-year licensing and others with five. 

It's not a cheap solution but it comes with its benefits.

It's all bundled. When we purchase this product, it is bundled with a support license for that period.

With our clients, there is a range of Fortinet FortiGate versions, anything from FortiGate 60E to FortiGate 3700D. 

Management connects to a FortiAnalyzer, and we have application firewalls as well.

We have a centralized data center where we have a combination of customers with on-premises equipment. This includes small devices to secure the customer's environment, and larger devices at the data center, specifically for our customers.

We try to build our services around Fortinet products.

We prefer to work with Fortinet products based on what we have learned from the Gartner Magic Quadrant, and I recommend them.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The virtual and hardware versions of the solution are mostly the same. 

The VM it's very quick for deployment. If we need to have a POC for a customer, if we don't have any hardware physically at our premises, at our store, in our office, we can download the VM from Fortinet and install all the VM to their environment in order to run it. If we have a customer that says "let's start tomorrow" we are able to do that in a way that's not possible with a hardware version.

Normally Fortinet is very flexible that it supports almost all environments. 

The solution is user friendly.

The cost of the solution is pretty fair.

The documentation is very good.

The SD-WAN is very good, as compared to, for example, Citrix SD-WAN which has an overall lack of security and needs to leverage other devices, like Palo Alto, to cover this.

The licensing needs to be improved. We need longer licensing periods, especially for POCs and trials. It should be for six months. Right now, it's too short of a timeframe. 

Overall as I say, the features-wise and performance-wise the VM and hardware versions are the same. The main difference is that the hardware-based option ins is more powerful compared to the VM version. 

Their technical support is not helpful and I try to avoid using it.

I've been using the solution for ten years. It's been a decade now.

We do occasionally get bugs on the solution, and when that happens, we do need to go to technical support to get the issue resolved.

Let's say tomorrow we want to upgrade in terms of memory, in terms of processor. If we are VM  based we are using files and by default, we have some spec which is set to the VM. If tomorrow we need more capacity for this logging, we can just upgrade it. We take an analyzer like G1 or G5 and we upload the license, and it will upgrade automatically. 

It's so much easier as compared to hardware, due to the fact that, with hardware, you need to change everything completely. 

We have nine people on our team working with the solution regularly.

The support for Fortinet is not very good, and so I tend not to contact them if I can avoid it. They are not good in their general response time. Some team members are quite technical, however, that's not everyone, and you aren't guaranteed to get someone who knows what they are talking about. Sometimes their answers are irrelevant as if they aren't even replying to your actual questions. Other times they tell you what you need is not possible.   

Fortinet has forums for users, and if you go there, you'll see that there are a lot of others saying they are unhappy with support as well. While I'm a big fan of Fortinet, I do not like their support.

We only really use it now if we have an issue with a bug and there's no workaround except to go right to them. Otherwise, we don't contact them.

The cost of the solution is good.

Normally I don't really push a virtual appliance. Some customers may be interested in a virtual appliance for scalability. For most of our customers, we are pushing hardware-based solutions and not a virtual appliance.

For example, if we have a customer that has a private data center in Mauritius and wants to have a hybrid solution, let's say to interconnect on the public cloud, and they want to do SD-WAN to secure it from the public to its current on-premises data center, normally we will go with the virtual appliance on the public side. 

I would recommend Fortinet's hardware 100% of the time, especially in comparison to Palo Alto. With the VM, it's a harder question to answer. A better question would be: what do you will prefer for a next-generation firewall? Do you prefer Fortinet? Do you recommend Fortinet or Cisco or Palo Alto? I would say personally I always recommend Fortinet. I will continue to due to the fact that the cost and the integration, and the general user-friendliness, are all impressive.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd rate it higher if it had a longer trial, better licensing, and stronger technical support. There are still places for improvement in the solution.

The solution is mainly used for remote connectivity and endpoint and gateway network security.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the V-Scanner which is the monitoring software. That's something that I love. 

We are able to closely monitor the usages of individual users and see their usage habits and other items, including the data itself, which gives us quite a bit of visibility.

I think one thing we couldn't find in the software console was all of our logs. In the logs themselves, for example, we couldn't find if a user was accessing all of the VPN. We don't get to know or we don't have a report that shows on what date or for how long and from what time he user has logged on. We don't have that particular feature or that kind of visibility. That could be improved. Reporting, therefore, in general, could be improved.

The one thing that could be improved is the integration with the exchange. The gateway level controls can be enhanced a bit more. For example, it's still little here and there. You do get malicious attacks and suspicious emails like spam. It's not like Sophos where we got a lot of spam email, and yet, it's still relatively vulnerable. It can be upgraded, maybe with a fifth-generation firmware that it is ready for unknown threats. 

Especially after this pandemic situation, it requires a little more enhancement. For an SME level organization, it's okay, but when it comes to corporate and banking enterprises it still requires a lot of enhancement. Comparing it to Palo Alto, for example, it's still very behind the curve.

We've been using the solution for two years.

The solution is very stable. It's reliable, for the most part.

It's stable, comparatively, to the fifth generation UDL appliances or other software that is available in the market. It's quite stable for the integration. It still requires more of a formal enhancement for speedy patches and speedy updates.

The solution has a moderate amount of scalability potential. I wouldn't say it's the best, however, it is possible to scale it if you need to.

We have about 25-30 people on the VM currently.

We've never had to contact Fortigate's technical support, so I can't speak to their quality of service. If we have any issues on the solution, we tend to handle the problem internally.

We used to have Sophos and we shifted to Fortinet about two years ago.

The integration of the active directory with Sophos was not up to spec. We decided to drop it and instead went ahead with Fortinet.

The initial setup was a bit difficult. It's not perfectly straightforward. This may have been due to the fact that we were using ISA, which is pretty determined, and we had to migrate from ISA to Sophos and from Sophos to Fortinet. It was a little difficult, but not that complex.

For us, the implementation took about two weeks.

Each quarter we have a managed service contract with the integrator and they do any preventative maintenance every quarter. We have four visits in a year that we have agreed upon. Every quarter they come to us and they do some penetration testing and see the usability features and give us a report.

We outsourced the implementation to an integrator that handled the setup for us. They also handle quarterly maintenance for us.

The pricing of the solution is moderate. It's competitive, although I wouldn't consider it a cheap solution per se.

Aside from the licensing, there are some add-ons that need to be added that we personally haven't added. There are features such as content filtering, etc., that we haven't opted for. However, users can add them on if they need to for an additional cost.

We're just customers. We don't have a professional relationship with the organization. We're using the latest version of the solution.

I have learned that they have some internal resources available. However, those who are not trained and certified should not be experimenting with it. 

I'd advise other organizations that, if they don't have a proper administrator who can monitor and maintain their appliance, it's better they if don't implement it. It's not like somebody who has a background of software can handle Fortinet. They need to be properly trained and knowledgable.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten overall.

We primarily use the solution for the security so that our systems will not be penetrated externally.

The security the solution provides is its most valuable feature. All the basic security we need is found within this product.

The functionality provided is very good.

It integrates well with FortiMail and the two combined add a nice layer of security for our on-prem emails.

As we just began implementing the solution, I'm not sure if there are any features missing. We haven't come across any shortcomings in the product yet.

We purchased the product through a reseller, and we don't have any issues with them and therefore, so far, don't have any issues with the solution itself.

The product may not be as robust as Palo Alto. However, unless you are a big bank, you probably won't need it to be.

This is the first time we've acquired a firewall. It's pretty much a new experience on our end. We haven't been using it long at all. 

We haven't had any issues when it comes to stability. It's been very good.

The scalability of the solution is good. We haven't faced any issues with expansion.

We have yet to contact technical support, as we've just started to use the product and haven't had any issues to speak of so far.

This is our first firewall. We didn't previously have a different solution.

The solution's setup was pretty straightforward. It took the team about two to three weeks to deploy it.

We had a reseller assist us with the implementation.

Fortigate is cheaper if you compare it to Palo Alto, a main competitor.

Our team evaluated Palo Alto as well, although I did not evaluate it directly. I'm not sure what the main difference was between Palo Alto and Fortigate.

However, we have evaluated Fortinet for the last four or five months and now we're officially acquiring the licenses for it. 

I believe the pricing was a big part of the decision to choose Fortigate.

We've also recently acquired FortiMail as well.

This solution has the basic functionalities required for a firewall. In fact, in terms of our evaluation, it's basic functionalities are enough for us. If I were to compare it to Palo Alto, it does not necessarily have the full capability of that particular solution. We're not a bank. We don't belong to the banking industry so we don't really need such high caliber firewalls that provide multiple levels of security. It's not required with our industry, so a mid-range firewall like Fortigate is perfect.

If your business is small or even enterprise-level, if it doesn't necessarily need multiple or heavy firewalls, Fortigate will actually work just fine for you.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It perfectly meets our requirements.

We primarily use the solution for LAN connections.

The solution has similar attributes to other competitors. 

The encryption detection is good.

In terms of administration, it's perfect.

The encryption detection could be improved. In my opinion, I think Sophos has better encryption detection than this solution.

The security of the solution could be better.

The interface needs to be updated and simplified.

The management could be more in-depth or clear. 

I've been using the solution for close to a year now. I've also been working with Fortigate's firewall solution for about two and a half years.

We haven't faced any issues with stability since I've been with the company. I haven't witnessed any bugs or glitches. Our organization is satisfied with the level of stability it has provided.

About 50% of our network users are currently on the solution. For the two companies that we have on the solution currently, there's probably 100 users in each company that use the solution.

I personally have never been in touch with technical support for Fortigate. I can't speak to any kind of experience. I have heard good reviews from other people, however.

I've used Sophos in the past.

There are some technical issues with Sophos, at least on the older version, but with XG they kind-of did an upgrade. The interface of Sophos is great. It makes it easy to manage. In terms of functionality, both Fortigate and Sophos are very good and have almost the same functionality. It does depend on the license you apply for, however.

If you subscribe to Sandstorm in Sophos, you should expect that you get the functionality of Sandstorm. 

They are both quite equal on the market for the most part.

In terms of the initial setup, a vendor did that for us. We just manage it. The solution was already in place before I started at the company. I don't have details in relation to its initial complexity or how long it took.

Our vendor set up the solution for us.

At this time, I'm unsure of what the costs related to the solution are. It's my understanding that support is part of the OEM fee and you do have to pay that yearly. However, it does depend on the arrangements with the OEM.

We did look at Barracuda, but we decided against them because it gets a bit too technical. Also, unlike Sophos, for example, you can't pick the license you want and instead have to buy a package that may include things you don't need. Barracuda's interface looks like something designed in the 90s as well, which was a turn-off.

We used to be on the cloud, but we phased it out more than a year ago.

I'd recommend the solution. It's one of the best on the market. It's great for financial services institutions. Security is important because of the type of companies that are typically dealing with it.

I'd advise that users use it within a firewall, to create a double layer of protection or something similar.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten, especially when comparing it to other solutions.

Our primary use cases are using the solution as a configuring solution or data management. We use it for simple data center segmentation.

We got a PCL segmentation instance that has been replaced with a virtual instance. This has benefitted our organization by quite a bit.

The solution's most valuable aspects are IPS and the signature.

I don't see any specific features that are missing from the solution right now.

The user interface needs to be improved.

I've been using the solution for about six to seven months now.

The stability of the solution is good. We haven't faced any issues at all while using the product.

I haven't attempted to scale the solution, so I can't speak to how easy or hard it would be to expand it.

In our organization, we currently have 500 users on the solution. They're mostly end-users and admins.

We were previously using Palo Alto before we switched to Fortigate. We switched after seeing the solution on a commercial.

The initial setup was not complex. The implementation proved to be straightforward.

The project took about one week in total, including deployment and configuration.

There was only a single person needed to handle the deployment process.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I only really use the solution for communication and ordering support.

We don't have a business relationship with Fortigate. We're just a customer.

We work in the archiving domain where a secure environment is very important. We have some special requirements regarding the security of infrastructure.

The product has issues with integration. I would like to see better integration in future releases of the product. 

I have using the product for five years. 

I would rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a ten out of ten. My company's four administrators have access to the solution. 

We required a solution that offered maintenance and support. Hence, we chose this product. 

The product's setup is not complex. The tool's deployment gets completed in a couple of hours. 

The solution's deployment was done in-house. 

We have seen ROI with the product's use.