We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiGate and Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."What I like the most is the configuration and that it's simple, and straightforward to maintain."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"FortiGate is on the cheaper end, and it offers good value."
"Fortigate is very scalable to serve our customers' needs. We have scaled already from fifty to more than a hundred instances of Fortinet FortiGate. Around 20 staff are required for deployment and maintenance, mostly engineers."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"We've found the solution to be pretty stable."
"FortiGate is flexible and easy to use."
"The most useful functionality of Fortinet FortiGate is the user interface, multiple engines, and their cloud with the latest integrations. Additionally, the Security Fabric tool is very good."
"The solution's user interface is very smooth compared to other products."
"The most valuable feature of Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is its performance and visibility."
"The solution helps to identify and mitigate DNS attacks."
"The security of the solution is perfect. It's very good at protecting us from attacks."
"The most valuable features of Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection are the services, DHCP, and debugging. Additionally, we can use APIs and ansible scripts."
"It is a stable solution."
"Centralized management of DNS, DHCP, and IPAM helped us a lot in simplifying and automating the management of network and services."
"DHCP is a basic service, and they've been doing it for years, so it's mature and stable."
"The stability of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"One of the problems I was having was with user mapping, and it is an issue for which I have escalated tickets with Fortinet support."
"Some of the filtering is not robust, you can escape it with a VPN. Some of the users bypass some of the filters. It catches some but it also misses some, that area could be improved. It's functioning reasonably but there's room for improvement in that area."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"The sniffing packets or packet captures, can be simplified and improved because it's a little confusing."
"The biggest "gotcha" is that if the client purchases what they call the UTM shared bundle, which has unified threat management on both, it's not as easy to manage if you have more than one firewall."
"The product does need better support in the cloud environment. It's not exactly cloud-native right now."
"There can be more security in hybrid implementations. When a customer has a hybrid environment where some parts are in the cloud, we need a consistent security solution for such scenarios."
"I think only the technical documentation and administration of box could be a little bit improved."
"There needs to be more capabilities in order to configure the console itself instead of the user interface dashboard. Configuring the DNS or DHCP through the console instead of the GUI dashboard would be better."
"The service monitoring information could be simplified of this appliance and the information displayed on the dashboards could be improved. I have not found one dashboard to be perfect. For example, in Splunk, I can create a dashboard in Grafana. However, in Grafana, it takes a very long time to create them. There should be another API to do it better."
"They are not supporting high query logging. They have a very limited size for the syslog, so they are usually asking for external storage, external network, and integration in order to keep the syslog. If you are considering the high volume traffic of the carrier-grade, then the syslog will hold for around five to 10 minutes. This is not enough time and it is being rotated. This is the main issue and the main limitation that we face with them that they need to work on."
"There is a steep learning curve to be able to use Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection well."
"There should be better alerts for when attacks are happening."
"The price could be reduced to improve the solution."
"Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection could be more user-friendly because you need knowledge if you want to use it. To handle the solution, you need to be a subject matter expert, so this is one area for improvement."
More Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiGate is ranked 2nd in Firewalls with 306 reviews while Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is ranked 2nd in Domain Name System (DNS) Security with 12 reviews. Fortinet FortiGate is rated 8.4, while Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiGate writes "It's a reliable solution that's easy to install and cheaper than competitors ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection writes "Stable, with good performance, and has no issues, support-wise". Fortinet FortiGate is most compared with Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX and WatchGuard Firebox, whereas Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, F5 BIG-IP DNS, Palo Alto Networks DNS Security, Zscaler Internet Access and EfficientIP DNS Guardian.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.