Fortinet FortiGate-VM Reviews

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 simply for its firewall functionality. It's the main reason we use it.

For myself, the UI is pretty much perfect. It's much easier to work with than Cisco's FirePOWER, for example. I prefer the way it is designed above everything else, even though Cisco may be better for a different reason. Fortigate is just hands down more intuitive and therefore users need less training. While a non-tech person may need a bit of training in terms of configuration, it's still easier than Cisco.

In terms of general features, I find Fortigate and Cisco very comparable. They technically do the same things. Both can drill down by IP or region, so, application-wise, they're very much the same. 

The stability could be improved. I find Cisco to be more stable than Fortigate, which is I major differentiator between the two.

I haven't really explored the cloud too much, as we deal mostly with an on-premises system. However, now with everyone working from home due to COVID-19, it's something I'm beginning to explore and something I think Fortigate needs to invest in and expand on. If they could do something that integrates the cloud effectively, maybe with a cloud provider like Azure, that would be helpful.

Fortigate could speed up its level of customer service in our region.

I've been using the solution for quite a few years now. It's been perhaps five or six years in total.

While the stability maybe isn't quite to the level of Cisco, it is a very cost-effective solution. It's cheap compared to Cisco. Licensing is very, very easy. It's much, much easier than Cisco where licensing is a pain. The Cisco licensing is very difficult to configure, which makes Fortigate a more attractive alternative even with less stability. 

That said, after working with Fortigate for many years, I haven't really encountered a lot of crashes or glitches. The hardware is very, very good. Once a power adapter failed on us and we just replaced it on the device and it was able to recover. With ASA, I can say so far so good. The hardware's really good. They've improved a lot of the hardware specs.

We haven't had any issues with scalability. If a company needs to build it out or expand, they really shouldn't have any issues.

The customer support for Fortigate is fine. Compared to Cisco, however, I would say Cisco's response might be a bit faster. If a device fails, they'll be onsite to replace it themselves. In my region, in terms of Fortigate's response to a similar event, users would have to go through the distributor and not directly to Fortigate. That's why it takes longer. It could be a bit easier, and if they did it a bit more like Cisco, I think it would be better. However, Fortigate's response isn't bad.

The initial setup was straightforward. A company just needs to get requirements from its customers and then they can just deploy. It's not complex at all.

Deployment takes about two weeks. The setup itself is very fast and you will have limited downtime. However, there will be fine-tuning that will be required and this may take weeks. If a customer gives new requirements at any time, you'll need to make some tweaks.

With Cisco, licensing is quite complex, but with Fortigate, you simply need to buy a bundle and they give you everything you'll require.

Right now, I'm also interested in learning more about Cisco, and how it compares to Fortigate. I know Cisco quite well, but I've never directly compared Cisco and Fortigate together before. Of course, I still believe I know Fortigate better.

We're resellers of both Cisco and Fortigate solutions.

I'd advise other companies or users to give a try. The Virtual Appliance is very easy to set up. In terms of scalability, it's easy enough to expand out, especially if you compare it to the hardware. For the virtual solution, it's easily upgraded. For the physical, you need to do a POC.

It really depends on what kind of distributor a company is working with. Some provide you all the resources. Others don't. I'm not sure how it works with the Cisco Virtual Appliance. For Cisco, I only know about the cloud. 

Normally, I provide my customer with Meraki. I won't provide a Cisco solution, even though Meraki is part of Cisco.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. There's still room for improvement. There could be a bit better support and not all solution providers offer this kind of Virtual Appliance in my region. Once more people use it, they may begin to improve on it even more.

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. 

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is used as a firewall for multiple servers.

Price is okay and can be considered in the middle range, provided we compare it with other solutions. So, the solution can be made cheaper.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM should have a public forum where engineers can ask and answer questions. This would make it easy for anyone to search for incidents and find solutions quickly without needing to ask for support. The forum should contain a lot of information to help users troubleshoot issues on their own.

The solution's support can be considered a bit slow since it takes some time to resolve issues. So, support needs to be improved.

Sizing can be challenging for customers interested in using Fortinet FortiGate-VM. They often ask for guidance on how to size the virtual machine for their needs properly.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for three years. Also, my company is an integrator for the solution, and I am using its first version since we did not have to update it.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I never had any problem with the solution's scalability. The solution's final customer can comment on its scalability.

In general, its scalability is good. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The technical support is okay. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten. Sometimes we need to find information quickly, and it can take time to open a ticket and go through the procedures of providing logs. But the support team is good. However, if we compare it to open-source solutions, developers can find information quickly over platforms like Slack. Network or site engineers need to open a ticket, and some of these tickets are not open-source. If we compare it to development engineers who can find answers quickly by searching on Google, there is a difference in the speed of finding solutions.

Positive

I don't have experience working with solutions deployed on the cloud, but I have experience with products deployed on-premises, like Veeam, which was deployed on the server, and VMware. I have worked with Palo Alto, which is a complicated solution.

The solution's initial setup process was very easy. The solution was deployed on the private cloud. The deployment process can be carried out in two weeks, and only three engineers are required. Maintenance can be carried out efficiently.

On a scale of one to ten, where ten is very expensive, I rate the solution around two or three. I think the solution's prices are okay, considering the services and features they offer.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is easy to test due to the available videos and QuickBooks with a lot of information. The solution is presented simply and is more robust in security compared to Palo Alto, which is complicated. For our team, Fortinet FortiGate-VM is the best choice as information is easily available on the internet, and it is open source. Unlike other solutions, we can find everything on how to deploy, manage, and support it. Moreover, we were provided Fortinet FortiGate-VM for free, which helped us develop our skills quickly.

It is a stable and good solution. Those planning to use the solution should go through Fortinet FortiGate-VM's guide and prepare for the integration while having a good design and good view. Also, it is important to plan deployment steps since step-by-step deployment of the solution is needed to avoid any problems. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

We use Fortinet FortiGate-VM as a firewall, for intrusion detection and prevention to protect our Azure data center, principal operation sites, and our mobile users. 

Together with the FortiAnalizer we have a better grasp of our security position and understand the type of adversary attacks our installations.

The thing that I like the most is that they're very willing to work with us to resolve issues that they haven't taken care of before in their product. 

The end-user protection suite is very good, including the log analysis feature that they now have.

The Fortinet solution has resolved the issues with Microsoft Azure active directory.  This integration allows us to build rules based on Grupo membership for access to data center assets on individual bases.

We have used the Fortigate and Forticlient solutions for three years and they have proven to be very stable solutions.  

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is very stable.

The solution has proven to be scalable to all our requirements. In the years using Fortinet, we have had no cases of scalability due to Fortinet. We have had to increase the firewall resources to deal with a large increase in Forticlient connections.

The technical support is very good.

Positive

We previously used Check Point. Though it is a good solution, the license costs became too high for our organization and obliged us to look for another option.

The initial setup was a little complicated due to our engineers working on knowledge of Checkpoint and trying to replicate the same configurations.  Hindsight finds it may have been less complicated to build the rules from the ground up rather than importing them.

Mostly through a vendor team at first, however, the process was plagued by miscommunications and inadequate scope definitions.

Be very clear with your security consultant who is proposing Fortinet as a solution regarding all the features and integrations you expect to achieve with the solution.

We reviewed Palo Alto, Barracuda, and Sophos.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.