Fortinet FortiGate-VM Reviews

The solution is primarily used for security. When a company has a hybrid solution and the client is looking for a next-generation firewall with all the bells and whistles inside, we recommend FortiGate.

The intrusion prevention systems are great.  

The anti-spam capabilities are really great.

The solution has a lot of very useful security features. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability potential is there.

The previous version, which was 7.1 or 7.2, was a little bit easier to use. It's kind of a little bit tricky to find the options from the firewall configurations now, in the latest version. Previously, it was easier to deal with. The whole dashboard that you get can be improved. They could organize the whole dashboard a bit more to put stuff under each other in a way that makes sense and makes everything easy to reach.

The costs could be lowered.

I've used the solution for a while. I've used it over the last 12 months.

We have found the stability to be good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The product is scalable. It is a little bit expensive on Azure when you use it on the cloud, however. If a company plans to expand it, they need to keep this in mind. However, even those on-premises can be highly scalable. 

The initial setup needs to be handled by a person knowledgeable in Fortinet products. 

We are implementors. We can handle the setup process for our clients.

The product does have the capabilities of providing an ROI to companies. 

The product could be cheaper. When a company scales it, it can get pricey.

The pricing, in fact, is the one aspect that could potentially make clients change their minds. In terms of features, it has almost everything - whatever someone would need. However, the price sometimes is the obstacle. It could force the client to go with a cheaper product. Especially on the cloud, a solution such as this can get costly as you are paying for the cloud stuff on top of the license, and you have to pay per hour.

We are implementors. 

We have both virtual and physical servers.

I would advise new users first to ensure they have strong knowledge before attempting an implementation. It has everything a company might need and it is scalable. However, the person doing the implementation itself needs to be skilled. There might be a lot of things going on during implementation that need to be dealt with properly.

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

My primary use case of this solution is for advanced security in the cloud, as well as SD-WAN and branch connectivity. We use version 6.4 and are just now moving to 7.0. 

FortiGate-VM has many valuable features: it's easy to use, it's intuitive, it's got very good traffic inspection features, it's got comprehensive filtering categories, and it has an extensive threat database, using FortiGuard. 

FortiGate-VM could be improved by making it cloud-based. I'd like it to be a cloud-based management solution instead of just a dedicated management orchestration tool. 

I have been using FortiGate-VM for five years. 

Personally, I like Fortinet support. I know other colleagues and people think it's slow, but I don't.

I used FortiGate for 10 years. I also have experience with Azure Firewall Premium, Cisco ASA, and Cisco Firepower. 

The installation is really easy. There's HA deployment in the marketplace involving Azure and AWS. I handle the installation myself. 

I implement this solution myself for customers. 

There are yearly or monthly licenses which you can choose from. 

I rate FortiGate-VM an eight out of ten. I recommend this solution to others. There's a use case, like any cloud-based firewall. 

We're an MSP, so we sell, configure, and manage these solutions for customers. 

We use the solution as a firewall. 

Fortinet is user-friendly. 

We have lost some information and we do not know how that happened through the solution. That needs improvement. 

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for minimum five years. 

Once in a while there are stability issues otherwise the solution is stable. 

Presently, six thousand users are using the solution. 

The initial setup of Fortinet is easy. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

I am a network engineer. I deploy firewalls for customers. I also provide firewall installation and configuration services.

I mostly prefer Fortinet firewalls. The graphical user interface is user-friendly and easy to configure. I recommend it to my clients because it is very easy to deploy. 

Performance, scalability, and everything else are top-notch compared to others like Sophos or Cisco. I've used them all, and Fortinet is my go-to.

The main use case is for organizations that can't afford or procure hardware appliances. They can install the VM and license it as a cost-effective alternative.

The combination of SD-WAN and VPN capabilities is the most valuable feature.

If I could add one feature, it would be free security profiles.

I have experience with FortiGate VM. I've used it for practice and deployed it on customer sites.

I have been using it for four years. 

I haven't personally experienced any bugs, and none of my clients have reported any either.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. 

The customer service and support are very knowledgeable and helpful.

I've deployed Cisco firewalls and hold certifications like CCNA and CCNP. But for security-level firewalls, I always go with FortiGate.

The initial configuration is very easy, even for non-technical users.

VMs can be affordable, but for high-demand scenarios, I'd still recommend the hardware. For the cost, it's a ten out of ten.

I would recommend the hardware firewall unless you have specific constraints. If you're installing on a server or desktop, and something happens like a cache issue, you won't have the same backup options as a physical appliance.

With hardware, you can claim a warranty, get a new unit, and easily restore from your existing backup. That wouldn't be as straightforward with a VM.

Over a hundred customers have deployed the physical Fortinet firewall based on my recommendations.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

Our primary use cases are using the solution as a configuring solution or data management. We use it for simple data center segmentation.

We got a PCL segmentation instance that has been replaced with a virtual instance. This has benefitted our organization by quite a bit.

The solution's most valuable aspects are IPS and the signature.

I don't see any specific features that are missing from the solution right now.

The user interface needs to be improved.

I've been using the solution for about six to seven months now.

The stability of the solution is good. We haven't faced any issues at all while using the product.

I haven't attempted to scale the solution, so I can't speak to how easy or hard it would be to expand it.

In our organization, we currently have 500 users on the solution. They're mostly end-users and admins.

We were previously using Palo Alto before we switched to Fortigate. We switched after seeing the solution on a commercial.

The initial setup was not complex. The implementation proved to be straightforward.

The project took about one week in total, including deployment and configuration.

There was only a single person needed to handle the deployment process.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I only really use the solution for communication and ordering support.

We don't have a business relationship with Fortigate. We're just a customer.

We use the product primarily in environments requiring robust network security and compliance, especially in the banking and enterprise sectors.

The platform has enhanced our organization's security posture by providing effective threat protection, bandwidth management, and SDN capabilities.

They could enhance the product's functionality for more comprehensive threat detection and mitigation, especially for large-scale deployments.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for several years. 

The product is stable. 

The product is scalable. 

The initial setup of FortiGate was straightforward. It involved detailed planning for appliance selection based on user numbers, throughput requirements, firewall, IPS capacity, and VPN needs. 

We managed the implementation in-house, leveraging our expertise in network configuration.

FortiGate offers a favorable ROI due to its competitive pricing structure and effective network security capabilities, making it a cost-effective choice for our organization.

We evaluated alternatives like Checkpoint and Palo Alto. We chose FortiGate for its cost-effectiveness, robust performance in our specific use cases, and the comprehensive support provided by Fortinet.

The product's threat protection features have been instrumental in managing subscription-based licensing and ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements, especially in banking environments.

I rate Fortinet FortiGate-VM an eight out of ten. 

We are using FortiGate-VM for the protection of our internal network and also for VPN services. Right now, there are about 200 end users in our main office and in other business units we have an additional 100-200 end users. We have about five different firewalls, yet almost all of our units are using FortiGate-VM. So, in total, we have about 500-600 users. 

The best part about FortiGate-VM is its strong security. Besides that, it's nice that there are different models for different sizes of businesses. For example, there are models tailored to enterprise companies and small organizations, and the model that we are using is perfectly suitable for our usage.

One thing that can be better is added automation. And, on top of that, enhanced security when it comes to the automation itself.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for five years.

I think it is stable. 

I am impressed by its scalability, given that we are already using it for over 500 users. And, in future, we plan to increase usage even more. 

We have used Palo Alto before, but we switched because at that time Fortinet was more scalable and there were more options available.

I also use Sophos Firewall, though not within the organization, but rather just for small business or personal use.

Currently, we only require the services of three engineers and administrators on our technical team when it comes to deployment and maintenance.

The license we pay is a yearly fee. I can't say it's very expensive; it is a good price and is highly suitable for our usage.

FortiGate-VM is a good solution, and I would say one of the best solutions on the market.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

It is primarily for VPN access and restricting access into the network. One of our clients has a shared system between multiple counties, and it is used to keep the right traffic flowing between counties and blocking the rest.

Each client has a specific version. We're trying to get them all current. Our number one client has the current version.

It provides greater security and flexibility. Instead of just opening it all up, it allows access to only those people who should have access. The network itself is pretty open, and with FortiGate, we can lock down exactly what they have access to.

Primarily, the VPN solution is most valuable. It allows you to have more flexibility in terms of what is there on the end-user device, and what is not there. You can check and make sure that they're current. It has more flexibility than just a straight VPN solution.

It works really well. It has the features that 99% of people need. 

They should keep us up to date about the latest version. That's the biggest thing. Currently, we have to go looking for the latest version. We should get notified about what's going on with the versions.

I would like to see easier dual-factor authentication.

Our clients have been using it for several years, and we've been helping them with that.

It is rock solid.

It is reasonably scalable. It is not as flexible in scalability as Cisco Firepower with their FMC.

Usually, the clients who use it are cost-conscious. They don't want to spend money on a Cisco device, so they go for Fortigate. A large organization usually goes with Cisco. A smaller organization tends to go for Fortigate or some other solution because of the price.

Our clients use it all over the place. It is not just for their internet. It is used for their internal networks and the rest of it.

It was average. I wasn't overly impressed. I was also not disappointed.

There is a little complexity to it but not more than other solutions. I haven't noticed greater complexity.

The deployment duration depends on how detailed you are and what you don't want to get. You can deploy one of these firewalls in half an hour, but if you're going to add a bunch of complexities and things to it, it can take at least a couple of hours to get it all set up the way you want. It ranges from half an hour to four hours.

We help our clients in implementing it. We also manage it. We just have one network support person to take care of things. It is not a job that requires more than one person.

There is no additional cost. Once you get the licensing fee, you're good.

Realize that it is not Cisco, and it doesn't work the same way. You got to pay attention to what you're doing. Those who are super familiar with Cisco got to pay attention to what you're doing because it works differently.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. It works well. Except for the dual-factor authentication feature, it has all the next-generation features that you need for a standard user.