Fortinet FortiGate Cloud Reviews

The FortiCloud is being used as a security fabric. It provides insights into the overall activity at the locations which we have deployed. We are in around 30 to 40 locations which we manage over a cloud. Managing is very simple via Fortinet, which really is a value-add to our technology - at least, the infrastructure portion, the management part. 

If you compare the manageability part with Palo Alto, the access via the GUI is very fast in Fortinet, as compared to Palo Alto. In Palo Alto, when saving any configuration, it takes two to three minutes of time while committing the configuration. In Fortinet, it is just a click and it just gets saved.

The intel we get from Fortinet is its most valuable aspect.

The solution could add load balancing and QS features at an application level. In Fortinet, they don't have application-level visibility as we have in Palo Alto. That is something Fortinet can improve on, the application-level visibility.

The SSL visibility could be better. The content which is encrypted, if they can add an encryption engine, which can check the traffic of SCTPS and do the analysis and the threat filtering, or the URL filtering, in the content, that would be ideal. That way, we don't have to purchase another separate product, like Content Peeper, or other products that do dedicated SSL filtering.

I'd like application-side reporting, for example, who are the top 10 users, what users are using what. 

In terms of the complexity, if they integrate and give the track-to reporting to management, that will be a great feature for a future release.

The scalability depends on the sizing. You need to ask: who is the system engineer who is sizing for the customer? For example, if you are the customer and you have a 50 user setup, and the system engineer is proposing a 30E, that may not be a good or an ideal model for 50 users. A 40F would likely be better, as, when we enable UTM, it will enable all the functionality and all the engines will get started, and it will get used. The CPU processing will get distributed among all the services, and then performance may be spread across as well. That's why, while doing the sizing, I would suggest that any system engineer sizes a little bit on the higher side so that, even if the user count goes up, or if the customer plans for scaling, then that won't be a challenge for near future.

For us, the majority of the customers are on Fortinet. A majority of the other customers are on Sophos, and a few customers are on Palo Alto. Most of the enterprise customers are on Palo Alto. Most of the SMB customers are on Fortinet.

The support is quite good. It depends upon the scope. If it's something implementation-based, they won't entertain you. However, if the issue is critical, then they will definitely help. Support is good. Fortinet has good support for India. I have no complaints.

We're also familiar with Palo Alto and Check Point. It's easier to manage or configure, as compared to Palo Alto or Check Point.

The deployment depends upon the requirements. Generally, if there is a standalone infrastructure, and someone wants to configure Fortinet, then it shouldn't take more than one day. However, if you have multi-locations, there might be multiple dependencies or local issues and other stuff, and the configurations may be different. There may be some pools that need to get access from this to that. That might take a few more days. That said, from an implementation aspect, Fortinet implementation is much easier as compared to Palo Alto.

How many people you need for maintenance depends on the nature of the business. For example, in banking, you need 24/7 uptime. You need at least one engineer in a shift to manage the Fortinet devices. Otherwise, two engineers are enough - one for deployment, and the same person can also manage the firewall. Therefore, one to two engineers are more than enough to manage firewalls, Fortinet, the traffic, and to do whitelisting, blacklisting, et cetera. They can do the troubleshooting part and open the ports according to the application requirements.

It is better to have a partner who knows the best practices in order to deploy everything properly. You need someone who can do the staging part, who can do the configuration part, who understands the basic things as well as be able to handle more difficult use cases. It is better to take a help of a partner or integrator.

I've definitely seen an ROI.

In terms of pricing, if it is a cloud subscription, then I prefer to go with the yearly subscription - if you don't have to scale much. However, when you're planning for on-prem devices, then you should go for a three-year license.

There's extra pricing for the UTM and the hardware cost. For a UTM license, they charge an extra fee.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We use the solution for network security. 

The tool is a mature product, ahead of brands like Sophos, though not quite at the Palo Alto or Checkpoint level. I'd rate it nine out of ten for being cost-effective and offering features similar to high-end options.

The most valuable feature is its user-friendly interface - even those unfamiliar with firewalls can easily manage it. Policy control and configuration are straightforward. Its main benefits are easy deployment, user satisfaction, clear security, and intuitive policy configuration without referencing external documents.

For improvement, I'd like to see basic endpoint security management integrated into the firewall with just a license addition.

I have been using the product for six to seven years. 

The tool's stability depends on proper configuration. Vulnerabilities often stem from improper setup rather than the product itself. 

The product is scalable and works well even for customers with more than defined users.

The support level isn't as strong as some other brands. 

Setup is quick, taking only about half an hour for basic configurations. The deployment process involves consoling the firewall, accessing the GUI through a port, and configuring policies based on user needs. More complex setups take longer.

I advise new users to keep using it, get trained, explore best practices, and stay in touch with technical experts. Like other brands, Fortinet FortiGate follows the SASE solution. I rate it a nine out of ten. 

We use Fortinet FortiGate Cloud for Fortinet VPN channeling and site-to-site VPN. We also use it to block some traffic.

Fortinet FortiGate Cloud has security features, like DDoS protection and UTM. Fortinet FortiGate Cloud is user-friendly. We can easily identify and use its features. So there won't be any difficulty in configuring, installing, or using it on a daily basis.

It would be much better if Fortinet FortiGate Cloud allowed third-party integrations like multi factor-authentication.

Better security features should be included in the next release.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate Cloud for two to three years.

I rate Fortinet FortiGate Cloud an eight out of ten for scalability. Our organization provides FinTech services, and we use the solution daily.

Fortinet FortiGate Cloud is very easy to set up. The initial setup for Fortinet FortiGate Cloud takes around 10 to 15 minutes. I rate Fortinet FortiGate Cloud a nine out of ten for its initial setup.

Fortinet FortiGate Cloud is moderately priced. I rate Fortinet FortiGate Cloud a five out of ten for pricing.

Overall, I rate Fortinet FortiGate Cloud a nine out of ten.

I work for a managed security service provider. We use this solution to deploy firewalls for our customers and then manage them on long-term contracts.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the remote management capability. 

There is room for improvement in their management and downtime. They're constantly doing maintenance and there are unexpected downtimes for the cloud interface. It seems like they are having some growing pains.

I have been using this solution for a year and a half.

I have no negative impression of the FortiGate firewalls. Like I said, sometimes the cloud interface leaves a little to be desired in availability, but I don't want to exaggerate that. Of course you never want it to be down, but occasionally it is.

The scalability is great so far, although I don't think we have enough clients on the solution to really speak to that. We currently have a dozen firewalls on it, but we plan to roll it out to close to 100 customers.

I've used FortiGate's tech support one or two times, and they were outstanding and resolved my issues.

There is a learning curve, but on a scale of one to five, with one being almost impossible and five being extremely easy, I would rate the setup process as a three or four. We deploy new firewalls for our customers using this solution about once a month.

There are licensing costs for the firewall, of course, and there are licensing costs for all the add-on products, like the antivirus licenses and content builders. For us personally, as the managed service provider, there are licensing costs to manage the devices and logs in the cloud. That's a whole separate license.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten.

We use this product for cyber security. It is our perimeter firewall.

This product is easy to manage and easy to use. It has a simple GUI.

If the SD-WAN technology were included free of cost then it would be more suitable for many users, including us.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate Cloud for three years.

Stability-wise, this service is the best.

As a perimeter firewall, all of the people connected to the network are going through it. I am not sure of the exact number but it is more than 1,000 people per day. At this point, we have no plan to increase our usage. In the future, if there is an upgraded version, it is something that we will think about. We are innovative and we need to stay up to date, according to the market.

For administration, only myself and one of my colleagues have access to it. Only one or two engineers are needed for maintenance.

We use the on-premises FortiGate Firewall solution in addition to FortiCloud.

We have pfSense available in the company but we have not run it since implementing FortiGate. It is available as a backup in case our FortiGate fails but this has not happened so we haven't used it.

I do not have any hands-on experience with other similar products.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Our implementation strategy was to get the world's best cybersecurity, perimeter firewall. We searched the internet to find this and we selected FortiGate. It took a maximum of one month for the implementation. It was not very challenging.

We implemented this product in-house.

This is not a product that we've seen ROI with because all hardware of this type, as well as software, has end-of-life. It's the maximum age of the product. We try to use it up until that point and then upgrade it.

The price of the product is approximately 10,000 Qatar Riyal ($2,750 USD), and another 10,000 Qatar Riyal for a three-year license. There are no additional costs, other than these.

I have evaluated other solutions such as SonicWall and pfSense. FortiGate is far better than these solutions. The biggest difference is the ease of use.

It is quite easy to use and manage FortiGate Cloud compared to pfSense.  For example, the other systems were a little more complicated and you need to be more technical to use them. With FortiGate, their GUI made it simple to use. Any normal user can use and access it.

In terms of cybersecurity protection, the sandbox features in FortiGate are very good when compared to the other two.

My advice for anybody who is looking into FortiGate Cloud is that if they're looking for the best security at a minimum price then this is a product that I recommend. It is the best firewall in the world. There are others that are good but also quite expensive. If you're in small or medium enterprise business, you should implement FortiGate.

Overall, I am very happy using this product. The vendor is doing a very good job. It is a top-listed product and there is nobody that can beat FortiGate.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using Fortinet FortiGate Cloud as a firewall.

The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate Cloud are the IPS, SSL Wireless, and VPN. Additionally, packet inspection and point-to-point VPN application control are useful.

Fortinet FortiGate Cloud could improve the dashboards.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate Cloud for approximately two years.

Fortinet FortiGate Cloud is a stable solution for users.

We have approximately 225 users using this solution.

Whenever we faced problems our vendors who are supporting Fortinet FortiGate Cloud have raised a ticket on our behalf. We never needed to go to Fortinet because whatever problem we face, our team or our vendor, they were capable of handling it for us.

The initial installation is straightforward. The time it takes for the implementation depends if you start building from scratch or not. However, it takes a maximum of two hours using two people, this includes the configuration, OS upgrades, and FCL configuration.

We used managed services and had a partner implement the solution. We have one system engineer that does the maintenance and support of Fortinet FortiGate Cloud.

The price of Fortinet FortiGate Cloud is reasonable when compared to Juniper and others, we are happy. We have a three-year subscription.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Fortinet FortiGate Cloud a nine out of ten.

The GUI interface is good.

The basic features are well-documented.

The installation is very simple. 

We have found the solution to be scalable. 

The stability is okay.

The support is not very good and is something they need to work on. I do not find them to be very helpful.

As with any IT vendor, there are software issues.

I've been using the solution for more than ten years. It's been over a decade at this point. I have used it for quite a while. 

The overall operation is pretty good. That said, the solution isn't completely stable. There's not a lot of bugs, and yet, there are bugs. Sometimes Fortinet says they will not fix a bug in a certain version as they considered it non-essential, however, for a user, it's a different story.

The scalability is good, and if a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's not a problem.

Technical support is not the greatest. L1 support works exclusively by script, sometimes not even looking at the case to see that the info they subsequently request is already included in the initial info provided when the case was opened. There seems to be no effort at all to reproduce customer issues. They aren't supporting, and sometimes they won't fix certain things, like bugs, as, to them, they do not consider the fix something essential.

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's pretty straightforward and simple. 

We are just a customer and an end-user. We are not a partner and don't have a business relationship with Fortinet. 

We have quite a mix of deployments. We have some FortiGates deployed in Azure, we have some FortiGates that are hardware only, and then we have some FortiGates that are on EFX or vSphere.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

I'd rate the product at a seven out of ten. mostly due to the lackluster support on offer. 

Our company has a partnership with Fortinet and we use the solution to provide dual authentication and BPM connection services for customers. We also help customers with product upgrades. 

The solution's ecosystem is very robust and includes a strong firewall. 

One firewall box can contain various top-of-the-line services that are packaged together for easy administration. 

The console or demonstration tool could be more user friendly. 

Better marketing is needed to elevate the solution. 

The solution partners with many vendors but some of them do not want to help or share information that would ensure good integrations. 

The EDR could use improvement to be more robust and in line with Darktrace. 

I have been using the solution for seven years. 

The solution is very stable. Some customers have been with the solution for four years with no issues. 

The solution is easy to scale in comparison to other products. 

In general, technical support is okay and issues are handled well 90% of the time.  Support could improve by being more aggressive with ticket follow ups. 

Technical support is good for us but that may be because we have a business relationship with the provider. Some of our customers have reported problems with ticketing. 

The initial setup is easy. Configurations take longer for large companies due to their complex infrastructures. 

We install the solution for customers. We have a highly skilled and experienced technical team so implementations are easy for us. A standard implementation can be done by one or two technicians. A large implementation for a company with at least 500 people can be completed by three technicians. 

Our process begins with an initial planning meeting. We configure the solution in our office and take it to our customers for deployment. Onsite work is easy and only requires a few connections and configurations. The customer sees an easy process because we prep by doing the complex work in our office. 

The solution is mid-priced when compared to other products. Cost is a factor for most customers in Costa Rica and the solution is a less expensive than Palo Alto.

Some customers follow the Gartner Magic Quadrant so they are looking for good products. The three main firewalls are the solution, Cisco, and Palo Alto.

In Costa Rica, the solution's main competitor is Cisco. The solution is easy to use but is constantly compared to Cisco which some customers say is more user friendly. The solution's console or demonstration tool seems to be the main issue with users. 

Palo Alto has a good reputation so some customers purchase it without comparing the price or characteristics of competitor products. The solution has better features than Palo Alto so it is important that its reputation gets elevated in the market.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.