Fortinet FortiNAC Reviews

We use the tool to connect different networks, like connecting one side to another. Additionally, we deploy some policies to allow certain users within the network environment.

The most valuable aspect of this product is its security features. Many customers prefer cheaper devices, but those often lack adequate security measures. It also supports compliance with industry regulations. 

Fortinet FortiNAC's price is expensive compared to other products. 

I have been using the solution for three to four years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten.

Fortinet FortiNAC's scalability is good. 

I haven't used the tool's support yet.

The tool's main difference from other products is security, ease of access, and integration with other devices.

The initial setup is not complex—it's quite straightforward. However, the complexity of the environment can vary depending on the customer's requirements.

It could be difficult, depending on the environment. Sometimes, we need integration with other devices, which adds complexity. It's particularly challenging when integrating with older vendors, as their installation processes are often more complex.

I rate it a nine out of ten.

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC's pricing an eight out of ten. 

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. 

It is mainly used when we integrate the solution with Fortinet firewalling, sandboxing, and the security fabric of Fortinet. In an all-out implementation where we implement different solutions, FortiNAC is one of the components in the entire ecosystem.

Its deployment is virtualized but on-prem.

The network segmentation is the most important part of the solution. The integration with the Zero Trust Access solution is a crucial part of segmenting your network.

There could be better integration with legacy equipment. It integrates perfectly with all Fortinet solutions, but if you look at other third-party integrations—not on the networking part; but more on the security infrastructure part—it's more limited.

Its stability and scalability can be better. Aruba ClearPass is better in these aspects.

I have used it only in the last few years. I had to do a few propositions. It has been only two or three years since I have been familiar with the FortiNAC solution.

Its stability and scalability are slightly lower than Aruba. I have a personal preference for Aruba ClearPass, so I would rate FortiNAC a seven out of 10 in these aspects.

We have internal support, so I don't have any issues with it.

It is pretty easy and straightforward. A default implementation can take two days. It is not that complex, but it also depends on the use cases that you have for the FortiNAC solution. So, it can be a really simple implementation, but it can also be months of implementation depending on the use case.

I would advise really considering the use cases that you want to implement. That's because Fortinet has multiple license models. There are Base, Plus, and Pro licenses, and depending on the license model, you have more possibilities for integration. If you want to implement something like a premium device or guest management, you can't take the Base model. You have to directly go to the Plus model or even Pro. Similarly, if you want incident correlations and incident management, you have to go to the higher license version. So, you must consider all the use cases that you want to implement before you make a decision so that you take the correct version.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

The primary use case is that we are using it as a network access control (NAC), preventing external devices from plugging into the network or foreign computers from joining the network.

We are using the latest version.

When it works, it's great. It keeps things off the network which are supposed to be off the network.

When it works, doing what it's supposed to.

Not using a Java front-end would be fantastic. It takes forever to load the system up and get in there to configure everything. It is too slow to do anything at all.

The stability is relatively poor, as it has taken us roughly 12 months to get the network access control to be functional. It took us six months to get the USB lockdown to work appropriately. It still false flags mice, etc. On top of it, it broke once we finally got the network access control working. It literally took us 12 months for people to be blocked on an Ethernet connection, and it takes about 90 seconds to knock them off. Even then, it's only 50/50. We have escalated this every week for 12 months, and I'm not sure we'll be renewing this contract.

The technical support is bad. We've had to escalate to Tier 2 and Tier 3. My customer relationship manager on the other side of this has stopped returning phone calls and emails, because there has been such a constant back and forth.

We didn't have something prior. We had someone do a security audit on us, and they made some recommendations of things that we were missing. We contacted a managed service provider to recommend things to fix these issues, and this was one of those things. We went with what the managed service provider recommended as a solution along with having a short timeframe.

The initial setup was highly complex. Every time you get one piece to work, everything else breaks. We have not been able to get a full solution in place.

We used a managed service provider to help get everything up and running.

The process was frustrating. The managed a lot of our network as is, and they've done several of these setups. They moved from the previous version to the newest version, and they have even stopped recommending it as a solution because they don't want to do this again with another customer.

Look into the complexity of using tools. Anything that is difficult to manage will probably be painful to maintain.

We have a very aggressive roadmap with a fairly mature security posture. 

We use Fortinet FortiNAC for network access and identity protection.

The product's most valuable feature is its ability to protect devices connected to network service.

The product could be more user-friendly in terms of GUI than HPE. The configuration needs improvement as well.

We have been using Fortinet FortiNAC for two years.

It is a stable platform. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability an eight out of ten. We have 100 users for it.

The product’s technical support services are good. Although sometimes, they respond slowly.

Neutral

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC’s initial setup process a seven out of ten. It takes two days to complete. The deployment process involves configuring the network access policies within the Azure environment.

It is a reasonable product.

It is a good product considering network security. It supports multiple devices and is easy to use. I can repair the box quickly in case of some failure. I rate it an eight out of ten.

FortiNAC provides authentication services for clients.

The users say that FortiNAC is configurable and easy to use. 

I've been using FortiNAC for about three years.

FortiNAC's performance is excellent.

FortiNAC could be more scalable. 

Setting up FortiNAC is straightforward, and it takes about a week to deploy. 

I rate Fortinet FortiNAC seven out of 10. It's a configurable product that integrates well with the other Fortinet products. It's easy to use and has a lot of features. It's tough for me to give a product a perfect 10. It must be simple, scalable, stable, and have excellent features covering almost all our technological needs. 

The product offers good profiling features and can support various vendor products.

FortiNAC could improve integration with other vendors and enhance stability to compete more effectively with solutions like Cisco ISE.

We've been using both FortiNAC for about four years.

We contacted Fortinet's technical support, who helped resolve our issues.

Positive

Cisco ISE is more stable but comes at a higher cost than FortiNAC.

Deploying FortiNAC can be time-consuming, especially considering the integration challenges with other vendors.

Integrating FortiNAC with other vendors can be challenging, especially for Ruckus and Intelisys. We find Cisco ISE more comfortable for vendor integration.

I recommend FortiNAC, but with the caveat that users may encounter challenges with integration and stability.

I rate it a seven out of ten.

The customer required centralizing control to control access, detection, and network control. He requested processing a simple management point, the access, the devices, and distribution, and wanted to manage all the customer devices. He had a history of working with FortiNAC devices and wanted us to do the same. So I installed the product to understand it. 

The features are more expandable. 

The interface works fine, but it could be better.

It was for a one-time product solution for a customer for about one year, and I'm still maintaining it. So far, we've had one client for it.

The solution is stable.

The product is scalable.

We never had to use customer service or support, so it expired.

Neutral

It was easy to set up the product. 

I would rate this solution seven out of ten.

We are only consultants, so we implement FortiNAC for our customers. The good part about FortiNAC is that it works seamlessly across either public cloud, private cloud, a hybrid one or on premises. So, depending on the client's requirements, I usually suggest that they go for public cloud where they have remote locations, and that they go for an application where they have a large deployment, adequate network and technical staff to support the requests.

The features we generally propose is basically agent-based authentication and the agent case solution product for wireless endpoints, which allow them to do automatic registration, and the third would be the health checks.

Something that the developers of FortiNAC might look at to improve, is more integration with third-party products. The dashboard also needs to improve.

FortiNAC is quite a stable solution. 

FortiNAC is a highly scalable product. The licenses remain unlimited. It's a subscription-based license, which is based on the usage and number of concurrent users. So the good part is that it can be deployed out of any environment.

The technical support for us has been extremely good and the local support is excellent. 

The initial setup was easy and straightforward. The deployment can be done within a day.

The good thing about FortiNAC is that it's more vendor agnostic. And then we have the deployed FortiNAC activate solution, which are different kinds of firewalls, which works perfectly fine. 

On a scale from one to 10, my rating for this program will be a nine. Additional features that I would like to see included in the next release of this solution is more integration with third-party products and probably some improvements on the dashboard.