Fortinet FortiNAC Reviews

We use the tool to ensure that we have network access. It also helps us avoid stranger devices getting into the LAN or Wi-Fi. 

The tool provides us with a list of devices that tries to connect to our network. It offers us a lot of network visibility.

The solution's licensing price should be improved. 

I have been using the product for three years. 

I would rate Fortinet FortiNAC's stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a ten out of ten. 

Fortinet FortiNAC's setup is straightforward. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use and it is high. 

I would rate the product an eight 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 used it for network access control of internal users on wired networks, as well as to enforce USB port blocking. Some complaints were directed to me, and that was the primary use case.

The device fingerprinting feature was helpful in creating and enforcing access policies. The device profiling feature allows you to create fingerprints and define acceptance policies based on that.

The user interface and the product's intuitiveness could be improved. In future releases, it would be great if they could improve the usability of the solution, particularly for SaaS environments.

I worked with the Fortinet FortiNAC solution for around four months.

Initially, during the first week or two, it was a bit unstable, but they were resolved.

It is scalable, especially with the VM part, allowing for easy expansion based on needs. Around 50 users were using FortiNAC from our customer side. 

The customer service and support team is really good. They know what they are doing. 

I have experience with other solutions as well. In terms of pros, I would say Fortinet has a simpler version, and it's more user-friendly when it comes to creating policies. As for cons, I'm not sure if it supports certain devices that require a more secure connection.

The initial setup required someone with experience. I would rate my experience with the initial setup around an eight out of ten, where ten is the most complex. So, it was moderately complex.

The documentation was comprehensive and well-documented. I didn't have any complaints working with it.

I deployed it virtually on a VMware server. I set it up, onboarded the devices, created the policies, and added the necessary configurations.

Deployment varied depending on user dependencies, but it took around ten days. There were three people involved in the deployment.

Moreover, it doesn't really require much maintenance besides regular updates.

I would recommend Fortinet FortiNAC. Overall, I would give it an eight out of ten. The UI could be improved, but overall, it's a good solution.

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.

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.

I have used Fortinet FortiNAC in medium-sized banks, offices, campuses, and distribution networks for control.

The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiNAC are access control, automation, artificial intelligence, analysis, and security, and it is a unified solution. You can combine a lot of features within the solution.

The automation in Fortinet FortiNAC could improve.

I have been using Fortinet FortiNAC for approximately five years.

Fortinet FortiNAC has been good.

The scalability we receive from Fortinet FortiNAC is enough for us.

We have not had any complaints about the technical support from Fortinet FortiNAC.

The initial setup of Fortinet FortiNAC is usually complicated, and you have to understand the installation well.

For the projects that we do the Fortinet FortiNAC is affordable.

I would recommend this solution to others, it is very good. They are a world leader in security and they have the best combination of network access.

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for VPN. I'm a product manager and we are customers of Fortinet. 

I like that it's easy to connect to a VPN without having any hassles and that you can get fast access to the information you need as a result. The solution is very easy to configure. 

We have some stability issues with the solution, the network drops out too often. We started using AWS and the line drops out less frequently than when we use Fortinet. 

I've been using this solution for four years. 

The initial setup is straightforward. The company provided all the information we needed to implement FortiNAC and that made deployment very easy. 

I rate this solution seven out of 10. 

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. 

We use Fortinet FortiNAC to receive excellent visibility of our network for traffic and what devices are connected to prevent attacks.

Fortinet FortiNAC could further improve its network visibility.

I have been using Fortinet FortiNAC for two and a half years.

Fortinet FortiNAC is a stable solution.

I have found Fortinet FortiNAC to be scalable.

The deployment of Fortinet FortiNAC could be better. When we are deploying the solution we have some level of dependencies with other vendors for their connection to Fortinet FortiNAC. Without these dependencies, it would be better.

Overall I am satisfied with the solution.

My advice to others wanting to implement Fortinet FortiNAC I would recommend before the start of the deployment to have a good summary of the documents ready. It makes it easier to follow the guides and have knowledge of their network beforehand.

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC an eight out of ten.