Fortinet FortiGate-VM Reviews

Whenever I need to deploy a Fortigate firewall, I go on Fortinet and do a trial license and work on it.  

The use case depends on the requirements. The requirements change from client to client. 

The virtual firewall feature is very good.

The solution is easy to deploy and manage, which makes it easy to test.

The products never disappoint us.

There are a lot of features that overlap and are similar to other products.

The setup is simple.  

I haven't had much of a chance to work on the VM environment too much. I don't have any notes for improvement. 

Technical support could be better. 

I've used the solution for two or three years on and off. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches when handling testing in the lab environment. 

The solution is scalable. You can expand it easily. 

I'm not sure if there is a local person in Pakistan. Whenever I try to contact support, there is always a delay and I have not been so happy with the support services on offer. 

I also use Sophos. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. With the deployment of any type of firewall, you do have to do some workarounds. As long as you know the specifications, you are good to go. I'd state the ease of setup eight out of ten. 

The deployment, so long as it is not a migration, only takes a few hours. 

They do offer a one-month free trial. 

They offer affordable pricing. It was not expensive. I'd rate it seven or eight out of ten in terms of affordability. 

We are Fortinet partners. 

The solution is pretty good. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I've had a great experience with the virtual environment. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Internally, I've been using this solution to front our servers.

I found the Antivirus and Anti-spam features most valuable in this solution. I'm happy with FortiGate-VM because it's good for our servers. It stopped many attacks, including spam, over our networks.

It's been a year since I started using FortiGate-VM.

I find this solution really stable.

The scalability of this solution is an eight or a nine to me. It's good.

I don't have experience with Fortinet's technical support. When I face any problem or issue, I call the company that came here to implement the device.

I hired a consultant to implement the solution. I had a good experience. It was good for my work and my networks.

FortiGate-VM is more expensive than Sophos. We have two appliances: a main appliance, then a backup, e.g. FortiGate-VM, and this make it so expensive, even more than the costs from Sophos.

We pay the standard three-year licensing fees.

I evaluated Sophos.

I spent many years using Cyber and Sophos. Mainly, I use Sophos, while I use FortiGate-VM in the network background.

I see that Fortinet is a big company. I can't compare the Sophos and Fortinet solutions I'm using, because I'm using Sophos at the front, and behind Sophos, I'm using FortiGate-VM, so I can't give a good comparison or opinion. I've only used FortiGate-VM for one year.

It took nearly one month to complete the FortiGate-VM deployment because the decision came from upper management.

No other users use FortiGate-VM in our organization, because it's a device or appliance that only stands in front of our servers.

We don't have a need for maintenance yet. We've only been using it for one year and it currently needs no maintenance.

I don't know if our organization has plans to increase the usage of FortiGate-VM because this decision will come from upper management.

I'm a good observer and I'm still learning some feature metrics of this solution.

What I'd like to advice people looking into implementing FortiGate-VM is to study the FAQs of other users. You should know the tricks and what exactly is needed in this appliance. This is a very good appliance, but I have less experience with it compared to Sophos which I've used for many years.

I'm rating FortiGate-VM an eight out of ten.

Maybe others rate the vendor a 10 out of 10, but I'm sticking with eight.

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. 

We primarily use the solution for the security so that our systems will not be penetrated externally.

The security the solution provides is its most valuable feature. All the basic security we need is found within this product.

The functionality provided is very good.

It integrates well with FortiMail and the two combined add a nice layer of security for our on-prem emails.

As we just began implementing the solution, I'm not sure if there are any features missing. We haven't come across any shortcomings in the product yet.

We purchased the product through a reseller, and we don't have any issues with them and therefore, so far, don't have any issues with the solution itself.

The product may not be as robust as Palo Alto. However, unless you are a big bank, you probably won't need it to be.

This is the first time we've acquired a firewall. It's pretty much a new experience on our end. We haven't been using it long at all. 

We haven't had any issues when it comes to stability. It's been very good.

The scalability of the solution is good. We haven't faced any issues with expansion.

We have yet to contact technical support, as we've just started to use the product and haven't had any issues to speak of so far.

This is our first firewall. We didn't previously have a different solution.

The solution's setup was pretty straightforward. It took the team about two to three weeks to deploy it.

We had a reseller assist us with the implementation.

Fortigate is cheaper if you compare it to Palo Alto, a main competitor.

Our team evaluated Palo Alto as well, although I did not evaluate it directly. I'm not sure what the main difference was between Palo Alto and Fortigate.

However, we have evaluated Fortinet for the last four or five months and now we're officially acquiring the licenses for it. 

I believe the pricing was a big part of the decision to choose Fortigate.

We've also recently acquired FortiMail as well.

This solution has the basic functionalities required for a firewall. In fact, in terms of our evaluation, it's basic functionalities are enough for us. If I were to compare it to Palo Alto, it does not necessarily have the full capability of that particular solution. We're not a bank. We don't belong to the banking industry so we don't really need such high caliber firewalls that provide multiple levels of security. It's not required with our industry, so a mid-range firewall like Fortigate is perfect.

If your business is small or even enterprise-level, if it doesn't necessarily need multiple or heavy firewalls, Fortigate will actually work just fine for you.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It perfectly meets our requirements.

We primarily use the solution for LAN connections.

The solution has similar attributes to other competitors. 

The encryption detection is good.

In terms of administration, it's perfect.

The encryption detection could be improved. In my opinion, I think Sophos has better encryption detection than this solution.

The security of the solution could be better.

The interface needs to be updated and simplified.

The management could be more in-depth or clear. 

I've been using the solution for close to a year now. I've also been working with Fortigate's firewall solution for about two and a half years.

We haven't faced any issues with stability since I've been with the company. I haven't witnessed any bugs or glitches. Our organization is satisfied with the level of stability it has provided.

About 50% of our network users are currently on the solution. For the two companies that we have on the solution currently, there's probably 100 users in each company that use the solution.

I personally have never been in touch with technical support for Fortigate. I can't speak to any kind of experience. I have heard good reviews from other people, however.

I've used Sophos in the past.

There are some technical issues with Sophos, at least on the older version, but with XG they kind-of did an upgrade. The interface of Sophos is great. It makes it easy to manage. In terms of functionality, both Fortigate and Sophos are very good and have almost the same functionality. It does depend on the license you apply for, however.

If you subscribe to Sandstorm in Sophos, you should expect that you get the functionality of Sandstorm. 

They are both quite equal on the market for the most part.

In terms of the initial setup, a vendor did that for us. We just manage it. The solution was already in place before I started at the company. I don't have details in relation to its initial complexity or how long it took.

Our vendor set up the solution for us.

At this time, I'm unsure of what the costs related to the solution are. It's my understanding that support is part of the OEM fee and you do have to pay that yearly. However, it does depend on the arrangements with the OEM.

We did look at Barracuda, but we decided against them because it gets a bit too technical. Also, unlike Sophos, for example, you can't pick the license you want and instead have to buy a package that may include things you don't need. Barracuda's interface looks like something designed in the 90s as well, which was a turn-off.

We used to be on the cloud, but we phased it out more than a year ago.

I'd recommend the solution. It's one of the best on the market. It's great for financial services institutions. Security is important because of the type of companies that are typically dealing with it.

I'd advise that users use it within a firewall, to create a double layer of protection or something similar.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten, especially when comparing it to other solutions.

In a recent scenario, a manufacturing company, was in need of migrating its services, specifically their ERP SAP application, to a cloud-native environment. They chose to migrate their servers to GCP for hosting. Since they required a firewall, they opted for cloud-native firewall solutions. They acquired two firewalls, one for internal usage and another from the GCP marketplace. Both firewall vendors provided yearly subscriptions. Following this, we proceeded with the configuration.

They established a VPN connection via the internal Forti firewall. Simultaneously, an external firewall from Palo Alto was set up. This external firewall, positioned at the perimeter, handled incoming traffic from Internet users. Our configuration focused on enabling ECPs for the Internet-based cloud network.

The ease of access and user-friendly setup is a valuable feature. Fortinet proves to be particularly straightforward to configure, offering simplicity without complexity. Moreover, visibility is easily attainable due to certain factors. Price, implementation, and budget considerations play a role. When it comes to Cisco implementation, the process tends to be more intricate, which many customers find unfavourable for their business needs.

Fortinet devices are acknowledged as highly potent and come with a notable cost. These devices offer extensive visibility, an array of configurations, and a range of security features. However, there's room for enhancement in their routing and switching security aspects, akin to Cisco's offerings.

A noteworthy aspect here is Meraki, which offers cloud controllers. If FortiGate were to introduce a similar cloud management solution, it could strongly compete with both Meraki and Cisco products. Cisco operates in two sectors: enterprise and SMB. Particularly in the SMB market, they hold sway due to their convenient cloud management features. For instance, Meraki's cameras and wireless access points can be easily controlled through their cloud management portal. If FortiGate were to provide cloud-based management solutions for SMB customers, it could cater to a significant portion of the market, considering that a substantial number of customers fall within the SMB and mid-level enterprise categories.

I have experience with Fortinet FortiGate-VM.

Hardware performance is a determining factor. A recent case made me notice that in comparison to the other vendors, Fortinet exhibited superior scalability. This was mainly due to their package-oriented approach, which involved scaling the VM version based on the number of customers. They offered various packages, and depending on the package, the VM version would be adjusted.I would rate it an eight out of ten.

I would rate scalability an eight out of ten.

The customer service and support is good. Within this domain, we have local support in place. They are primarily responsible for initial support. However, if a situation exceeds their capabilities, they escalate it to level two support. This setup is highly satisfactory.

Positive

FortiGate offers straightforward planning and a user-friendly interface. This simplicity is seen through graphical user interfaces (GUIs), enhanced visibility and effective troubleshooting. I would rate it eight out of ten. 

In the industry landscape, approximately seventy per cent of businesses predominantly rely on on-premise solutions. Specifically, our focus is directed towards banking clients, who are aligned with the guidelines of the Central Bank due to their emphasis on security, governance, and compliance protocols. However, the manufacturing sector and telecommunications companies are more inclined towards cloud adoption. This inclination is rooted in factors such as cost efficiency and power savings, internal infrastructure maintenance and resource allocation, including power and human resources.

In Sri Lanka, the banking and finance sector still prefers on-premise solutions. This choice is aligned with their security compliance needs and regulatory considerations.

In our proposals involving FortiGate, it's common practice to include FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer. Over the past two years, many clients have adopted FortiManager for cloud-based management. We've facilitated this by providing cloud subscriptions, allowing them to manage their FortiManager through the cloud. This approach is well-received, and it's worth noting that even in the banking sector, some customers prefer on-premise setups for their FortiManager.

It would be beneficial for Forti to expand its cybersecurity solutions even further. While solutions like FortiSolor exist, there's room to enhance feature sets in line with the increasing requirements of compliance and private security needs. These can effectively address client-side security needs. Comparing Forti's offerings to competitors, certain strengths stand out. There are notable visibility and flexible configuration options. The client-side experience benefits from robust management capabilities accessible through this solution and the troubleshooting becomes seamless because of good visibility and an effective controller. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for securing our network.

The solution's intrusion detection feature is excellent.

The solution's web-filtering configuration could be more straightforward. It takes a long time to configure.

I have been using the solution for eight years.

The solution is primarily stable. Although, some time ago, there were performance drops where it was freezing as the logs were full. We managed to resolve the issue. I rate its stability eight out of ten.

It is a very scalable product. The solution users in our organization include IT managers, finance officers, accountants, and chief financial officers. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

The solution's support team is excellent and efficient.

Positive

The solution's initial setup and configuration are straightforward. But if someone is trying to put policies and restrictions in place, then one has to understand many things. It takes one and half hours to configure and requires two executives for maintenance.

Initially, the solution's price was high for us. But it decreased on the purchase of more than one license.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it a nine.

We use FortiGate as an edge security device. We are system integrators and we use this product ourselves, as well as implement it for our clients.

The geofencing and blocking capabilities for all non-domestic countries lower the attack surface by approximately 85%.

The most valuable feature is geofencing, where we can block all access from all non-domestic locations.

In the next releases, it would be nice to see central cloud management.

They have an on-premises solution that you can deploy for fleet management or for multiple site management, but it seems like a cloud solution would be a little bit easier.

We have been using FortiGate for the past two years.

We are using the latest version.

This is a very stable solution.

So far, this product has scaled very well. We have approximately 100 deployed, as edge devices. Currently, it is our only edge device and we plan to continue rolling it out in the future.

Their technical support is great.

We used Cisco ASAs exclusively before changing exclusively to FortiGate.

We decided to change to FortiGate because the entitlement was too difficult on Cisco.

The initial setup is straightforward and it takes approximately two hours to deploy.

Licensing is pretty standard. It's approximately 15% of the total cost per year as a subscription cost.

The subscription cost also includes support for entitlement, which was not the case with Cisco. That was the deciding factor. We changed our whole install base because of that.

There are no additional costs other than the standard licensing fees.

I would recommend stopping waiting to use Fortinet Fortigate. It's really a great solution and their support is very good. SonicWall has awful support. I can't say more strongly how bad SonicWall has ever been.

With the engineers, everything is difficult to phrase. They don't understand what you're trying to do. They should understand. Their first-level support is terrible. They really don't understand. You can't get to the next level without going through level one. 

Level one is terrible. It's frustrating enough that we just do it ourselves with Google articles because of this.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.