Fortinet FortiWeb Reviews

Fortinet FortiWeb has improved my organization by protecting our customers' web infrastructure environment.

The most valuable feature is the web application firewall (WAF).

Their support needs improvement.

No stability issues.

No scalability issues.

I would rate their technical support as a nine out of 10.

We previously used NetScaler.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The pricing is reasonable.

Not applicable.

Evaluate this product against other vendors out there.

We were previously a partner.

We use Fortinet FortiWeb for our VPN. The solution is always updated to the latest version.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

It's easy to use and allows us to integrate solutions together.

The solution could have more customization.

I have used this solution for one year.

It's very stable.

I would rate the stability as six out of ten.

It's scalable. 

I would rate the scalability as seven out of ten.

Technical support is helpful and they respond quickly. I would rate them as eight out of ten.

I would rate the setup as five out of ten.

Our IT department implemented the solution.

The cost isn't expensive.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.

The most valuable features of the product are its IPS and VPN server.

The device is very handy and it helps us to protect our web and database servers from being penetrated from outside the office.

The antivirus and the IPS can be improved in the future.

I have used it for about two years.

Fortunately, we have not yet encountered any stability issues!

With the 600-C model, we had some scalability issues.

I did not previously use a different solution.

Initial setup was very straightforward and simple.

These devices, especially the 1500-D model, are really worth purchasing and using.

Before choosing this product, we evaluated many products such as Cisco, Juniper, Cyberoam, and Sophos.

In my opinion, the FortiGate appliances, and especially the D series, are really powerful ones and worth providing for your network.

We were able to protect our web servers from outside attacks. It has really helped us with publishing servers which were published on Microsoft Forefront TMG.

All of its feature are valuable to us. If you ask me which is the most valuable, it is the load balancing, then I would say the security features. Publishing OWA is also a good feature.

We started with FortiWeb400C, then we did an upgrade to FortiWeb 400D. I had some small problems when I was upgrading firmware. After the upgrade, some of my certificates were deleted.

The false positives are also annoying.

We did not encounter with any stability issues.

We did not encounter with any scalability issues.

Fortinet technical support is really good. I would give them a nine out of 10.

We did not use a WAF before. We used Microsoft TMG, but it is not a WAF.

Initial setup is straightforward, and it is not too complex.

It really pays off to buy licences for multiple years.

No.

It is a really good product. It is worth using in your network.

With other vendors you need to go through a learning period. With FortiWeb you can just apply a high-security profile and move on. It's very easy to reduce false positives.

• Built-in security templates
• AV integrated
• Strong threat intelligence

Also, if you serve files or you accept files with your server, Fortiweb has built-in antivirus. The Fortinet product family also provides good IP intelligence (botnet C&C, etc.).

Requires very little effort to add device to topology or replace existing WAF device with FortiWeb.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

Eight out of 10.

F5, A10, KEMP.

It's very easy.

Be sure to look at industry reviews, they have good knowledge about threat intelligence.

• Firewall policy

• Internet
• Servers

I have used it for a year and a half.

We had one stability issue when I ran it once with Wireshark; it froze.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

I cannot rate technical support because I have not used it yet.

I switched from SonicWALL to Fortinet. I am happier now.

Initial setup was not that difficult. It was different to my previous solution; I could do it on my own.

Before choosing this product, I did not evaluate other options.

• Be aware of logs.
• Does not compare with Check Point about finding policies.

• UTM
• Ease of use
• Built-in server load balancing
• VPN
• Next-gen firewall features

It provides good security visibility.

A BYOD feature is missing; this could be a good add-on.

I have used it for about 18 months.

I did not really encounter any stability issues; it performs well.

I have not encountered any scalability issues in 18 months.

Technical support is average; it could improve.

We previously used Cisco PIX and ASA. We switched because there is no next-gen firewall in the Cisco portfolio.

Initial setup was straightforward.

Pricing is competitive. Licensing could get expensive as we add feature sets.

Before choosing this product, we evaluated Palo Alto, SonicWALL and Juniper.

It is a good option, keeping in mind pricing and features.

We primarily use the solution for configuration and structuring policy.

The solution has a very simple deployment.

There are lots of great features within the product. Even though I don't personally use too many of them, it's nice to have them available.

It may be better if it were easier to create roles.

The interface could be a bit better.

Everything is pretty manual. We do need to improvise a bit. Automation might make it easier.

The pricing is a little bit high for us.

I've been using the solution for about one year.

The solution is stable. I don't recall dealing with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's pretty reliable.

The solution is scalable. We always check our information before we hit any limitations. I just need to assess my servers and the amount of traffic. I believe it to be scalable enough.

We have about five users on the solution currently. They're engineers. We have one box. Many users just need one box. If you want a firewall, or you want various applications on a firewall, you need another box.

We don't have direct experience with their technical support team. If we need technical support, we get it from the distributor. If we do reach out to them, it's typically for diagnostics. So far, we've been satisfied with the level of support we've received.

The initial setup isn't too complex. It's pretty straightforward. The product has a model deployment. You just need one port. After that, access is simple.

The deployment and installation took about one day. It is pretty fast because the setup is pretty easy to execute on.

For deployment, you just need two people. You don't need a bunch of staff to handle it.

We're an integrator. We just appraise the distributor behind us in order to help us in the deployment. It's a really simple deployment though. An organization most likely wouldn't need assistance. A solution like Cisco may require assistance as there would need to be adjustments done on it. It's a bit more complex.

The solution can be a bit expensive. It's not a product line. We use other devices as well as it's not a one-stop-shop. If you need a firewall, for example, you need to buy another product, like Fortinet. FortiWeb doesn't cover things like firewalls. 

The license itself is also quite expensive.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

Usually, for our security programs, I'm using on-prem. For now, in my experience, the typical Indonesian customer is using on-prem, as they worry about using the cloud, as the data cannot be stored in HR and it's actually often stored in another country. 

It's my understanding that we'll continue to use the solution for a while to come.

Overall, I would recommend the product. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it at an eight. If it had a better interface and/or better pricing, I might rate it a bit higher.