We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiToken and Microsoft Entra ID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Authentication Systems solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its ease of installation is most valuable. It took me five minutes, and it was up and running. It didn't take me that long. The installation on the cell phones is pretty simple."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"FortiToken is available in a soft or hard token factor, so there's some flexibility in that. Beyond that, I would say it is a stable solution that has worked for us."
"We like the mobile FortiToken."
"Fortinet FortiToken provides security and authenticates that the right external people are working with a company's system."
"The integrated Fortinet security with the app that allows you to easily do the two-factor authentication is most valuable."
"The token-based authentication is good and modern aspect."
"The deployment is quick and simple."
"It's very easy to run and it's part of their ecosystem and I don't think it's going anywhere anytime soon."
"The solution has some great features, such as identity governance, and user self-service. The Outlook application is very good and is used by a lot of people even if they are using Google services."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to delegate roles to each individual resource, which is great."
"In terms of identity management, it helps to improve security posture. It generally helps in terms cloud security, simplicity, and single sign-on for multiple apps."
"Conditional Access, Geofencing, and Azure Multi-Factor Authentication are the major security features to secure resources."
"Technical support has been great."
"It enhanced our end user experience quite a bit. Instead of the days of having to contact the service desk with challenges for choosing their password, users can go in and do it themselves locally, regardless of where they are in the world. This has certainly made it a better experience accessing their applications. Previously, a lot of times, they had to remember multiple usernames and passwords for different systems. This solution brings it all together, using a single sign-on experience."
"This solution is less time-consuming. We don't have to hire as many resources to give permissions to a particular user or group for any application."
"It needs a lot of coupling with their other Fortinet products. To implement FortiToken, I most probably need to couple it with FortiAuthenticator for full implementation. An RSA token can be used with many devices, whereas Fortinet FortiToken is always linked to only one FortiGate device. If I want to reuse the token across five or six FortiGates, I would have to get the FortiAuthenticator product. I can't use one token to connect to different FortiGates, and I need to get another product to enable this functionality. They should also improve the support for their mobile client. There should be a more detailed roadmap for the operating systems being supported. Some of our users were using an old iOS iPhone, and they were forced to get a newer phone because FortiToken didn't support that version of iOS. Similarly, there may be a version of Android that is not supported, so the users need to change the phone. This was one of the reasons why our deployment took longer."
"Fortinet support has some room for improvement. It has taken a long time to resolve some issues or find a workaround."
"The tool could be a little cheaper."
"Maybe the price could be improved, and the integration could be better. But the integration is different from the authenticator side."
"I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. The migration issue definitely brings it down a bit."
"Fortinet FortiToken should improve its push notifications."
"Configuration can be confusing due to the lack of community and context-sensitive help. We've had to rely on technical support, which slows down the setup process."
"The app could be improved so that you don't have to actually type in the code. It would be great if you can just do a prompt or push similar to the way Duo does."
"The documentation, and the way that people are notified of updates, are things that can be improved. I'm a big fan of Microsoft products but the way they document is not that great."
"The synchronization between my AD and Azure AD needs improvement."
"The product needs to be more user-friendly."
"We have a custom solution now running to tie all those Azure ADs together. We use the B2B functionality for that. Improvements are already on the roadmap for Azure AD in that area. I think they will make it easier to work together between two different tenants in Azure AD, because normally one tenant is a security boundary. For example, company one has a tenant and company two has a tenant, and then you can do B2B collaboration between those, but it is still quite limited. For our use case, it is enough currently. However, if we want to extend the collaboration even further, then we need an easier way to collaborate between two tenants, but I think that is already on the roadmap of Azure AD anyway."
"The Cloud Provisioning Agent cannot provision a lot of the information that AD Connect does. For starters, the lightweight version cannot synchronize device information. If you have computers on-premises, the information about them will not be synchronized by the Cloud Provisioning Agent. In addition, if you have a user on the cloud and he changes his password, that information should be written back to the on-premises instance. But that workflow cannot be done with the lightweight agent. It can only be done with the more robust version."
"Four years ago, we had an issue with Azure AD. We wanted to reverse sync from Azure AD to on-prem Active Directory, but we couldn't achieve this. Azure AD could connect only in one way, for example, from your site to Azure. If you needed to do the reverse and connect from Azure to on-prem, there was no way to achieve it. We asked Microsoft, and they told us that they don't support it."
"Many of the features are outdated, so the UI and UX could be improved."
"Azure Active Directory could be made easier to use. We have large amounts of data and storage. We are looking for video files and media content for applications, we will think about options, such as cloud storage or a CDN."
Fortinet FortiToken is ranked 4th in Authentication Systems with 21 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Authentication Systems with 190 reviews. Fortinet FortiToken is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiToken writes "A stable and scalable solution that provides an affordable and perpetual license". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves us time and money and features Conditional Access policies, SSPR, and MFA". Fortinet FortiToken is most compared with Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Cisco Duo, Yubico YubiKey, RSA SecurID and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator. See our Fortinet FortiToken vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Authentication Systems vendors.
We monitor all Authentication Systems reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
