Fortinet FortiNAC Reviews

We use the tool to support critical systems in sectors like energy and water companies.

The integration between switches, access points, management, analyzer, and other components is excellent. Everything is stable and can be managed from one place.

The tool's usability isn't very comfortable, and there’s a gap between what we need and what it currently offers.

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC's scalability an eight out of ten. My company has 250 users. 

My impressions about Fortinet FortiNAC's support are not good. 

The solution's deployment is complex. Deployment typically took around three weeks with two people involved. We had to open several tickets with Fortinet for support, but not all issues were resolved, so the system isn't fully optimized.

I rate the overall solution a four out of ten. Its integration with existing infrastructure is easy. 

We use Fortinet FortiNAC to control user access and enforce system policies.

Fortinet FortiNAC helps add an extra layer of security.

The ease of deployment is valuable.

Fortinet FortiNAC's device compatibility could be improved, particularly for VoIP devices.

I have been using Fortinet FortiNAC for two years.

We have experienced stability issues, particularly with the latest firmware versions. The extended development cycle for these updates makes us hesitant to adopt new products immediately upon their release.

I would rate the stability of Fortinet FortiNAC a seven out of ten.

Fortinet FortiNAC is scalable.

When I compare the support of Fortinet to Cisco, I find it to be good but not as good as Cisco's.

Neutral

We previously used Cisco ISE and switched to Fortinet FortiNAC because the users found it more user-friendly and it was cheaper.

The deployment is straightforward and takes around 60 days to complete.

Fortinet FortiNAC is reasonably priced.

I would rate Fortinet FortiNAC a seven out of ten.

We use the solution as a firewall to protect the network.

The solution's technical support needs improvement.

We have been using the solution for two or three years.

It is a scalable solution. Our organization has more than 200 users and plans to increase its usage.

The solution's technical support could be better.

I have used Sophos, CyberArk, and Palo Alto solutions earlier.

We require two executives for the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

The solution generates a return on investment for us. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. It is a good product.

We use this solution to control the network.

With FortiNAC, we don't need to configure the mass client site or access points. For example, we don't need to configure the switching site for a client's site. With Persistent Agent, it makes it much easier.

I would like to be able to compare the configuration backup before and after.

After version nine, the solution has been stable. There were some issues with stability in the previous versions.

It is a scalable solution. Some of my customers have nearly 100 endpoints. I use sync topology with my customer who has over 2000 clients or endpoints.

The technical support is fast, and I would rate them at nine out of ten for speed.

I would rate the documentation in relation to problem solving at seven out of ten.

Fortinet FortiNAC is easier to deploy than Cisco ISE or Aruba ClearPass. However, you have to know authentication systems and requirements when implementing on NAC devices.

FortiNAC's price has gone up in the last year. However, compared to other solutions, such as Cisco ISE, it is cheaper.

If you're considering implementing FortiNAC, I recommend determining which type of implementation is suitable for your needs.

FortiNAC can handle most configurations easily, but Cisco ISE works with only Cisco devices. Thus, FortiNAC is suitable for multivendor topologies, whereas Cisco ISE is not. Overall, I would rate FortiNAC at eight out of ten.

Fortinet FortiNAC is a network address control solution that we use as an identity and access management server. We integrate it with network devices and workstations to create policies and privileges for network access and device management. It also performs posture checks on Windows workstations to ensure compliance with security policies before granting network access. Essentially, it profiles endpoints and workstations, and checks for security compliance (such as updated patches, enabled firewall, and vulnerability compliance) before granting network access.

The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiNAC is its integration with all other Fortinet solutions.

The GUI and network visibility in Fortinet FortiNAC could improve.

Integration with 3rd-party devices can be improved.

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC for approximately two years.

Fortinet FortiNAC is stable.

We have one customer using this solution.

We have approximately 20 users using the solution.

The solution is scalable.

I have contacted the support from Fortinet FortiNAC. The response time could be quicker.

I rate the support from Fortinet FortiNAC a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I have used Cisco ISE and Aruba ClearPass, and Fortinet FortiNAC is a lot easier to set up.

The initial setup of Fortinet FortiNAC is easy. The time it took to set up was approximately five hours.

The solution is expensive. However, it is not as expensive as other solutions, such as Cisco ISE.

If people are looking for a smooth operation and don't want the trouble of using Cisco ISE or Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC is a great solution to consider. It's easy to set up, especially if you have an all-Fortinet environment with FortiSwitches, FortiGate Firewall, and FortiAPs. It can make your life much easier.

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC a seven out of ten.

The customer required centralizing control to control access, detection, and network control. He requested processing a simple management point, the access, the devices, and distribution, and wanted to manage all the customer devices. He had a history of working with FortiNAC devices and wanted us to do the same. So I installed the product to understand it. 

The features are more expandable. 

The interface works fine, but it could be better.

It was for a one-time product solution for a customer for about one year, and I'm still maintaining it. So far, we've had one client for it.

The solution is stable.

The product is scalable.

We never had to use customer service or support, so it expired.

Neutral

It was easy to set up the product. 

I would rate this solution seven out of ten.

It is mainly used when we integrate the solution with Fortinet firewalling, sandboxing, and the security fabric of Fortinet. In an all-out implementation where we implement different solutions, FortiNAC is one of the components in the entire ecosystem.

Its deployment is virtualized but on-prem.

The network segmentation is the most important part of the solution. The integration with the Zero Trust Access solution is a crucial part of segmenting your network.

There could be better integration with legacy equipment. It integrates perfectly with all Fortinet solutions, but if you look at other third-party integrations—not on the networking part; but more on the security infrastructure part—it's more limited.

Its stability and scalability can be better. Aruba ClearPass is better in these aspects.

I have used it only in the last few years. I had to do a few propositions. It has been only two or three years since I have been familiar with the FortiNAC solution.

Its stability and scalability are slightly lower than Aruba. I have a personal preference for Aruba ClearPass, so I would rate FortiNAC a seven out of 10 in these aspects.

We have internal support, so I don't have any issues with it.

It is pretty easy and straightforward. A default implementation can take two days. It is not that complex, but it also depends on the use cases that you have for the FortiNAC solution. So, it can be a really simple implementation, but it can also be months of implementation depending on the use case.

I would advise really considering the use cases that you want to implement. That's because Fortinet has multiple license models. There are Base, Plus, and Pro licenses, and depending on the license model, you have more possibilities for integration. If you want to implement something like a premium device or guest management, you can't take the Base model. You have to directly go to the Plus model or even Pro. Similarly, if you want incident correlations and incident management, you have to go to the higher license version. So, you must consider all the use cases that you want to implement before you make a decision so that you take the correct version.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

FortiNAC provides authentication services for clients.

The users say that FortiNAC is configurable and easy to use. 

I've been using FortiNAC for about three years.

FortiNAC's performance is excellent.

FortiNAC could be more scalable. 

Setting up FortiNAC is straightforward, and it takes about a week to deploy. 

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC seven out of 10. It's a configurable product that integrates well with the other Fortinet products. It's easy to use and has a lot of features. It's tough for me to give a product a perfect 10. It must be simple, scalable, stable, and have excellent features covering almost all our technological needs.