What is our primary use case?
The primary use of Fortinet FortiClient is to protect endpoint devices against various types of cyber threats, such as viruses, trojans, spyware, and phishing attacks. It also helps to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive data and networks and can be used to control access to specific applications and websites.
In addition to endpoint protection, FortiClient can also be used to create secure VPN connections to enable remote access to company resources like Jira, code repositories, corporate Wiki, etc.
How has it helped my organization?
It has a horrible performance. It is one of the most unstable VPNs I have ever used.
Since the project was pushed to use, many employees complained about its instability.
Sure, it has some advanced features, and it is not fair to evaluate it as a VPN only. Unfortunately, the company policies bring most of the resources through protection, and without the VPN, you will be simply blocked.
Therefore, we are paying so much attention to it. With a slow or unstable internet connection, Fortinet becomes a nightmare. I personally numerous times printed tasks from Jira to PDF for other employees due to VPN issues.
What is most valuable?
The solution is easy to configure and manage.
It is designed to bring additional safety to the machine (it is hard to uninstall by an ordinal user, and it has an in-built web filter). However, implementation is far behind industry standards.
For instance, the Web filter is a component that provides protection against web-based threats by blocking access to malicious or inappropriate websites. It might bring additional safety. However, in the real world, it constantly produces:
- False Positives, which can result in legitimate websites being blocked. This can be frustrating for end-users and potentially impact their productivity.
- FortiClient's Web filter may also over-block certain websites, even if they are not malicious or inappropriate. This could result in users being unable to access legitimate websites that are important for their work, causing delays or disruptions.
What needs improvement?
The solution needs network stability, especially when the internet connection is not stable.
Forticlient should provide proper polling functionality to try to keep the session alive by all possible means. We have seen certain improvements over the past year. However, it is simply not enough to be treated as a good yet even acceptable tool to use. It is currently producing more issues than adds value.
The web filter quite often blocks random sites, including online dictionaries, governmental sites, etc. Review of the wrong block reports simply doesn't work.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've used the solution for around a year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The solution is not stable enough.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The solution offers a weak performance.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
After the merger, our project was forced to use Forticlient.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I know nothing about pricing.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We had no options to choose from.
What other advice do I have?
If your employees might have a weak internet connection (for instance, mobile) think twice before choosing this configuration. If you decide to have FortiClient, never use the WebFilter component. Even Microsoft analog works better (if you really need it).
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.