Fortinet FortiClient Reviews

Our customers choose the FortiClient as a solution for endpoint security because 90% of them are already using FortiGate as a firewall. FortiClient is interoperable with Fortinet firewalls, so, for them, installation and implementation are easy.

The most useful features are the reports that come from the end user's machines and devices. You have everything in one place to tell you what's happening on the network. 

It's a unique system and they have unique technical support. If something is wrong with a firewall or FortiClient, the client does not need to call different vendors. Fortinet has only one vendor and one technical support team.

On the other hand, it's easy for the system administrators to use.

Fortinet should support older Windows versions. Their competitor, Kaspersky, has an embedded security solution that covers HP and the oldest version of Windows, those before Windows 10 or Windows Vista.

In Eastern Europe, for example, there are a lot of companies that are still using Windows XP on their machines. Their machines, therefore, cannot be properly protected by FortiClient and they can easily end up with a Trojan horse in their system. Basically, anybody can jump into their network through these machines that are not covered and properly secured.

I have been using this solution since the beginning. 

FortiClient is a stable solution. 

It is scalable. However, the scalability depends on a variety of factors. 

We have had a few clients complain about Fortinet's tech support because it is not as big as Cisco's. However, Cisco is the biggest company on the market for these kinds of products. They have extensive tech support and they can get back to clients quickly. 

With Fortinet, some clients have to wait two to four days for a response. That is the biggest complaint from end customers about Fortinet's technical support.

The initial setup is easy. Our clients use the FortiClient EMS, which is the central console for installing FortiClient. It is easy and very user friendly.

The pricing is reasonable if you compare it to some other vendors. Of course, you can always get an additional discount from the Fortinet channel and account managers. You can also shop around with different vendors to see who will give you a better price. 

It's useful to permit users working from home to connect to the internal infrastructure, sort of as an on-prem resource, in a secure way.

I find it very easy to configure and also very stable. It integrates well with Windows 10.

An area of improvement could be better integration with the active directory. I did not find it easy to configure.

I worked with different versions of Fortinet for two years, specifically in 2019 and 2020. I used it to configure the server part of the FortiClient.

It is a stable solution.

It's not very scalable. We don't have a lot of availability. We only have one gateway and the clients connect to it.

It depends on the product you buy based on the performance, but you can start from 200 and above.

The customer service and support are good. Although, the only point I don't like is that they take too much time to escalate the case. You have to do a lot of things yourself, even if it's something that needs their attention, so it's quite difficult to escalate it a little bit.

The initial setup is quite easy. It's not so much about the technical staff as it is about the initial configuration on the firewall side. This includes setting up certificates for secure connections and creating groups for users. It requires understanding what is needed for each group and user and then configuring it accordingly. If it's a new deployment, it's quite easy. However, it could be more difficult if you need to replicate it from other systems.

The deployment process involved several steps to ensure the solution was properly configured and accessible.

First of all, we had to configure the company's firewall to ensure it was deployed correctly. Then we had to configure the interface to connect to the system, set up certificate group user policies, and configure all the necessary steps. After that, we had to install FortiClient and configure it correctly to ensure the resources were accessible.

The deployment process took around two weeks to complete, but that was because we had to ensure everything was configured correctly and tested thoroughly before it could be fully implemented.

There are no licensing fees for the VPN.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

It is for a VPN connection. It only has one purpose, and Fortinet is doing very well.

It is used for mobile offices, and/or for our own company so that we can connect to the company network using the VPN. We also do remote access to our customer's environment. They all have FortiGate equipment for firewalls, and we connect to their networks.

We are using its latest version.

We like its centralized administration, integration with Active Directory, deployment, and stability of the connection.

It fits perfectly with our FortiGate firewall equipment. We are just using FortiGate firewalls, and these FortiGate firewalls make it very easy to use FortiClient because it is just a natural fit. Another advantage is its integration with the antivirus solution of Fortinet. If someone is using the antivirus software by Fortinet, it is the same agent. So, it perfectly integrates with the complete security stack if you are using the VPN and antivirus from the same brand.

The user interface on the central server could be improved.

In terms of additional features, the only thing I could imagine is that it should handle not only FortiClient VPN connections; it should also integrate with OpenVPN, for example. They should open it up for non-FortiGate devices. It is not a must, but it would be nice to have.

I have been using this solution for about two years.

Its stability is great.

We haven't reached the limit.

The support of Fortinet for their products is great. The same is true for the Fortinet VPN client. There are a lot of online resources, and you can go through frequently asked questions. You have an online knowledge base, and you have a support company in the background to call and open a ticket with Fortinet. The responsiveness of Fortinet is very good. I would rate them a four out of five.

Positive

It is straightforward. If you set up your environment correctly and it is centrally managed, it is just a matter of 10 to 15 minutes to set up a VPN connection to a new client. It is absolutely fast.

We are an integrator. Its deployment and maintenance can be perfectly handled by one administrator. We have a team for management because if a person is on vacation or ill, the other person can take over, but one administrator would also be perfectly okay.

We do not track return on investment. So, I don't have any numbers.

I don't know it by heart, but it is comparable to other solutions. It is based on the number of clients. It is probably 50 Euros per year per client. It greatly depends on the number of clients you're handling because the more clients you are ordering it for, the cheaper it will be.

I would totally recommend it. The stability of the connection is great. The performance is also great, and I don't see any big improvements that are necessary. 

I would rate it an 8 out of 10. I haven't seen a software I would give a 10 because 10 would just mean that the company can just sit back and do nothing else in the future.

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. 

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.

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:

1. False Positives, which can result in legitimate websites being blocked. This can be frustrating for end-users and potentially impact their productivity.
2. 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.

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. 

I've used the solution for around a year.

The solution is not stable enough.

The solution offers a weak performance.

After the merger, our project was forced to use Forticlient.

I know nothing about pricing.

We had no options to choose from.

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).

We primarily use the solution for remote access.

It's very easy to use. It's nice and much easier to use than other solutions we've seen in action.

The initial setup is simple.

It is a scalable product.

The stability is great.

The EDR feature to be included in the basic license.

The stability is good. We have never experienced an outage.

I have seen it working before COVID and during COVID. It has scaled up quite easily. There's no problem with expanding it.

Right now, I'm in a small company and there are 50 users. Previously, a year ago, I was in a bigger organization with 300 users that were using FortiClient.

I haven't had any incident or any interaction with the technical support service.

I've used other solutions in the past. One main difference is it is light, so it consumes minimum resources. The user does not understand the difference in the performance of the endpoint of the laptop or the PC. 

It's easy to implement. I'd rate it at a five out of five in terms of ease of execution.

We handle the implementations in-house. We do not need any integrators or consultants to assist us. 

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We are using Fortinet FortiClient to allow our workers to connect remotely to work. This is mostly because of the lockdown or if they are on vacation.

FortiClient has not given us any ongoing problems. We did have a problem with uninstalling it, but we opened up a service request ticket to resolve it.

The solution can improve by adding new remote console or endpoint features to make the solution easier to use.

In a future release, the web client section could improve by adding more features, such as a firewall.

I have been using Fortinet FortiClient for approximately two months.

The solution is stable, we have not had any issues in the time we have been using it.

The scalability of Fortinet FortiClient has been good.

We have had some problems related to FortiClient and other products, which is related to Fortinet. We have owned other Fortinet solutions which have had a problem connecting with the switch. We have opened a service request ticket on their system, and it has been nearly one month and they are still looking for a solution.

The installation was easy, we did not face any major issues. We had one small issue related to the proxy settings because we did not have a direct connection to the internet. When we applied the license to the FortiClient, we needed to connect through EMS. However, because we do not have a direct connection to the internet, we needed a proxy, but later resolved it. We created a service request ticket and they said that there was no proxy feature, that is why we created a second adapter and it allowed us to have internet. If there were proxy settings on their EMS, it would have been beneficial.

I rate Fortinet FortiClient an eight out of ten.

The primary use case is for remote access from having encrypted tunnels for our users back into our firewall. It was what was available at that point. We no longer are using a Fortinet firewall, which was the reason we stopped using FortiClient. While it was available, it was a good solution.

We had some issues using IPsec as a remote tunnel protocol and we had to change those configurations from IPsec to SSL. That was the only issue we had with FortiClient during the four years we used it. 

Everybody else is doing AI, machine learning, self-healing, next-generation features. They should incorporate more next-generation features. 

The stability is excellent. 

It scaled very well. We had close to a hundred users running the solution without an issue.

Technical support was excellent. 

Before FortiClient we were using Microsoft RAS, Remote Access Server. We moved to FortiClient when we installed the Fortinet firewalls.

The initial setup was very straightforward. It was on demand. We would have our help desk level one technicians do the installation on the end user laptops. The deployment strategy was as needed or on demand. The deployment took half an hour of a level one technician's time.

We didn't have technical staff for this, it was a very simple software to deploy. We had a manual that we would give the users. It was a self-serve. Apart from our installation, it was very simple to use. It had a lot of options which we really didn't use like vulnerability assessment or patching. We just used it for remote access. 

We did the implementation ourselves. 

The return on investment was very reasonable. It was low cost and it functioned, so the return on investment was excellent. The integration was the firewall. Being able to a have firewall log that actually logged my FortiClient information and being able to have a centralized console to give me visibility, was the main reason we used FortiClient, because of its integration with the firewalls.

Licensing was free up to ten users and after that, it was pretty reasonable.

I would advise someone considering this solution to use as much functionality as possible on the endpoint. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten. It fills remote access needs. I give it a seven because of the issues we had between IPsec and SSL. I also give it a seven for its cost, which is very low. It was a good product while I had it.

I primarily use FortiClient for VPN connectivity and endpoint security, providing protection against malware on laptops and desktops. It is particularly beneficial for internal access in the office, using VPN to access our system.

The most valuable feature of FortiClient is its user-friendly interface that allows easy navigation and access to all endpoint devices. Its vulnerability detection is very useful, as it provides insights into vulnerabilities on both desktops and laptops through EMS management. Additionally, its compliance enforcement capabilities are highly reliable, especially when enforcing policies.

The endpoint side of FortiClient needs improvement, specifically the agent-based endpoint, which requires enhancements in detection and additional features to reduce bugs.

I have been using Fortinet for almost seven years now.

The support is rated five out of ten. The main issue revolves around addressing bugs in the endpoint.

Neutral

The initial setup of FortiClient is rated eight out of ten, suggesting that it was relatively straightforward.

I rate FortiClient seven out of ten.