Fortinet FortiGate-VM Reviews

We use the solution for the private cloud.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM has a standard hardware firewall and easy deployment. You download a pre-configured virtual machine and run it on your hypervisor, Hyper-V, or ESXi by VMware. It is an excellent solution for private cloud setups, allowing seamless management using Fortinet without additional hardware purchases. Moreover, it offers flexibility—you can integrate it with physical hardware for redundancy or establish branch office VPNs effortlessly. Fortinet's automation capabilities facilitate smooth connectivity between public and private clouds.

The solution is highly scalable, depending on the type of hardware it runs on. You need knowledge of hypervisors to learn about the virtualized environment.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM as an integrator for one year.

The product is stable.

We cater the solution to SMBs.

I have used SonicWall. Fortinet has fewer hardware requirements than SonicWall. The basic requirement is the same.

The initial setup is easy and doesn't take more than one hour.

ROI is pretty good because it's simply software as a service. You subscribe to a service, and VM is available from FortiGate to download, install, and run. You get all the features. The scalability depends upon the hardware or VM. It could be serving 1000s or 100s users, depending on the configuration.

The solution is expensive.

It could have some versions limited by several users to reduce the price. Else, they could limit the product features, and create some version for a smaller organization with basic requirements.

Support is additional and comes apart from the subscription.

There's not much maintenance required. One to two people is required. Patches and upgrades are required and happen automatically if you've configured it that way. It is easy to deploy over the cloud. There are ready appliances to run in a public cloud like Amazon, Microsoft, or Google Cloud.

I recommend the solution. It is fantastic, easy to deploy, and very scalable. It saves a lot of time. Some particular hardware is not available in stock. FortiGate-VM is a good alternative. You could download, configure, and apply it. You could buy it online or from a Fortinet partner. It's quick and easy to set up.

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

My company functions as a mobile operator and supports business customers. We use the solution for our infrastructure and firewalls. 

The tool's most valuable feature is its ability to deploy it on live physical hardware. Specifically, when providing firewall services for clients, we can leverage such hardware appliances to support multiple customers on the same hardware.

The product needs to focus on cloud-nativeness and pricing. 

I have been using the product for six to seven years. 

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is a good solution in terms of stability. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten. 

The tool's technical support is good. 

We rely on automation for deployment, making it easy for us. We clone the existing infrastructure for additional customers. Our challenging aspect is coordinating with clients to set up the infrastructure. Understanding the existing infrastructure of business customers, especially their premises and specific requirements, is a crucial step.

I rate Fortinet FortiGate-VM's pricing a six out of ten. 

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten. 

The tool is expensive. 

I have been working with the product for two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a ten out of ten. 

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is scalable. We have 15 users. 

Fortinet FortiGate-VM's deployment is easy. 

I rate Fortinet FortiGate-VM an eight out of ten. 

I am a network engineer. I deploy firewalls for customers. I also provide firewall installation and configuration services.

I mostly prefer Fortinet firewalls. The graphical user interface is user-friendly and easy to configure. I recommend it to my clients because it is very easy to deploy. 

Performance, scalability, and everything else are top-notch compared to others like Sophos or Cisco. I've used them all, and Fortinet is my go-to.

The main use case is for organizations that can't afford or procure hardware appliances. They can install the VM and license it as a cost-effective alternative.

The combination of SD-WAN and VPN capabilities is the most valuable feature.

If I could add one feature, it would be free security profiles.

I have experience with FortiGate VM. I've used it for practice and deployed it on customer sites.

I have been using it for four years. 

I haven't personally experienced any bugs, and none of my clients have reported any either.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. 

The customer service and support are very knowledgeable and helpful.

I've deployed Cisco firewalls and hold certifications like CCNA and CCNP. But for security-level firewalls, I always go with FortiGate.

The initial configuration is very easy, even for non-technical users.

VMs can be affordable, but for high-demand scenarios, I'd still recommend the hardware. For the cost, it's a ten out of ten.

I would recommend the hardware firewall unless you have specific constraints. If you're installing on a server or desktop, and something happens like a cache issue, you won't have the same backup options as a physical appliance.

With hardware, you can claim a warranty, get a new unit, and easily restore from your existing backup. That wouldn't be as straightforward with a VM.

Over a hundred customers have deployed the physical Fortinet firewall based on my recommendations.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We use Fortinet FortiGate-VM for managing inbound and outbound internet traffic through our environment. Sometimes, we also use it for managing the site's internet outbound and routing. We also use it for IPSec on Azure. We also have an on-premises environment, and we're using it for IPSec on that environment. 

All the routing happens through it because we're swinging all the traffic on the Azure side through a firewall which is basically the gateway. It acts as the gateway and manages outbound traffic in that environment. We have also set up the SSL VPN for users. We do have FortiGate on-premise, and we set up the SSL VPN connection for users.

It made the routing of traffic seamless and it helped us with SD-WAN as well as load balancing.

I like the visibility and monitoring features because they're easy to use to monitor traffic. Features like geo-blocking and more have AI, and we're currently using all of it. But for now, we're only using geo-blocking, and we're able to block traffic from different countries. I also like that it's highly responsive. VM04 is also very powerful.

It would be better if it could provide you with options before completely blocking anything through the web filter. If you are doing a deep SSL inspection on the site if it says it's expired, it doesn't give you the option to continue at your own risk. I can't say that it's bad, but SSL internally isn't really a requirement. However, its security features can help. Right now, we have people going out and spending on purchasing the SSL certificates for internal sites. 

I have been using this solution for three years.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is a stable and very reliable solution.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is a scalable solution. It's very powerful, and I've never seen that machine running out of resources. It always worked.

Tech support is okay, but we do a lot of management by ourselves. We have a third party that we use when we do implementations, and I haven't contacted Fortinet even though I have access to it. The local support that we use costs much less. 

I still remember using Check Point, and it took a long time to apply a policy. To install the policy, you had to wait for ten to 20 minutes or even 30 minutes. Fortinet FortiGate-VM instantly applies the policy on the FortiGate itself.

The initial setup was difficult because we were all new when it came to the Azure environment. It was a little difficult to create space and understand that you have to have more than one interface. But once you get used to it. It's pretty straightforward.

It's straightforward if you have all that is required when you're clearing your traffic. If you're clearing your traffic already into your internal length to communicate with the firewall range, and you have information and understand it before the implementation, it will be very seamless. It will be stress-free when you understand the environment where you're going to implement it.

Our license is yearly, but we're thinking of going monthly. I think it's somewhere around 100,000 for VM04. Nowadays, everyone wants to be a hacker, so we believe in security. That's why we also have third-party people that we involve to make sure that we're secure. 

I don't think the costs are too bad. You still want to get advice from people who worked in security for many years, so you add a third party. The third party also said they would give their share like 100K, or 200K or something like that, so I don't think it's too expensive for security. I think it just adds more trust. 

We have been using Check Point Firewall so it was easy to identity the difference.

I will recommend the solution. If it's a first-time deployment in Azure, they need to understand a couple of things, like the interfaces we need to create. The good thing about FortiGate is that they don't hide how their devices work. You can go to their website and get every instruction that you need at any time. It's straightforward and even has pictures showing you what you should expect. I've done a few changes for the first time, and I didn't have to stress. But you must know the infrastructure well.

On a scale from one to ten, I would five Fortinet FortiGate-VM a ten.

Internally, I've been using this solution to front our servers.

I found the Antivirus and Anti-spam features most valuable in this solution. I'm happy with FortiGate-VM because it's good for our servers. It stopped many attacks, including spam, over our networks.

It's been a year since I started using FortiGate-VM.

I find this solution really stable.

The scalability of this solution is an eight or a nine to me. It's good.

I don't have experience with Fortinet's technical support. When I face any problem or issue, I call the company that came here to implement the device.

I hired a consultant to implement the solution. I had a good experience. It was good for my work and my networks.

FortiGate-VM is more expensive than Sophos. We have two appliances: a main appliance, then a backup, e.g. FortiGate-VM, and this make it so expensive, even more than the costs from Sophos.

We pay the standard three-year licensing fees.

I evaluated Sophos.

I spent many years using Cyber and Sophos. Mainly, I use Sophos, while I use FortiGate-VM in the network background.

I see that Fortinet is a big company. I can't compare the Sophos and Fortinet solutions I'm using, because I'm using Sophos at the front, and behind Sophos, I'm using FortiGate-VM, so I can't give a good comparison or opinion. I've only used FortiGate-VM for one year.

It took nearly one month to complete the FortiGate-VM deployment because the decision came from upper management.

No other users use FortiGate-VM in our organization, because it's a device or appliance that only stands in front of our servers.

We don't have a need for maintenance yet. We've only been using it for one year and it currently needs no maintenance.

I don't know if our organization has plans to increase the usage of FortiGate-VM because this decision will come from upper management.

I'm a good observer and I'm still learning some feature metrics of this solution.

What I'd like to advice people looking into implementing FortiGate-VM is to study the FAQs of other users. You should know the tricks and what exactly is needed in this appliance. This is a very good appliance, but I have less experience with it compared to Sophos which I've used for many years.

I'm rating FortiGate-VM an eight out of ten.

Maybe others rate the vendor a 10 out of 10, but I'm sticking with eight.

The solution is primarily used for security. When a company has a hybrid solution and the client is looking for a next-generation firewall with all the bells and whistles inside, we recommend FortiGate.

The intrusion prevention systems are great.  

The anti-spam capabilities are really great.

The solution has a lot of very useful security features. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability potential is there.

The previous version, which was 7.1 or 7.2, was a little bit easier to use. It's kind of a little bit tricky to find the options from the firewall configurations now, in the latest version. Previously, it was easier to deal with. The whole dashboard that you get can be improved. They could organize the whole dashboard a bit more to put stuff under each other in a way that makes sense and makes everything easy to reach.

The costs could be lowered.

I've used the solution for a while. I've used it over the last 12 months.

We have found the stability to be good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The product is scalable. It is a little bit expensive on Azure when you use it on the cloud, however. If a company plans to expand it, they need to keep this in mind. However, even those on-premises can be highly scalable. 

The initial setup needs to be handled by a person knowledgeable in Fortinet products. 

We are implementors. We can handle the setup process for our clients.

The product does have the capabilities of providing an ROI to companies. 

The product could be cheaper. When a company scales it, it can get pricey.

The pricing, in fact, is the one aspect that could potentially make clients change their minds. In terms of features, it has almost everything - whatever someone would need. However, the price sometimes is the obstacle. It could force the client to go with a cheaper product. Especially on the cloud, a solution such as this can get costly as you are paying for the cloud stuff on top of the license, and you have to pay per hour.

We are implementors. 

We have both virtual and physical servers.

I would advise new users first to ensure they have strong knowledge before attempting an implementation. It has everything a company might need and it is scalable. However, the person doing the implementation itself needs to be skilled. There might be a lot of things going on during implementation that need to be dealt with properly.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.