Fortinet FortiOS Reviews

The primary use case is for integrated cybersecurity.  

The VDOM (Virtual DOM) is a virtualized firewall that has some opportunities for flexibility that are an advantage in certain configurations. The other valuable part is that this flexibility makes it easy to integrate with Cisco products.  

The product really has everything that we need as far as features for this type of solution and our use case. It works fine for us. One thing that can be improved is the pricing model. It is currently subscription-based and I think they should probably try to change that.  

We have been using FortiO since around 2016. So we have been using it for four years.  

We had some issues with the stability of FortiOS, but I do not think it was because of Fortinet. It was because of how the integrator handled the configurations. The partner that implemented it originally did not do it optimally. We ended up having to change the partner in order to have it done correctly.  

So far we are satisfied with the technical support. We have not had a lot of need to use them.  

We had been using Check Point and we still use it. In fact, we have been working with Check Point more than Fortinet. I may be a bit biased toward Check Point because I already have more implementation support for it than FortiOS.  

The difference between the price of the products is also obvious. Pricing is more flexible with Check Point than with Fortinet. Fortinet ends up being more expensive because of the pricing scheme.  

The pros and cons of them are not so much different. If it were my choice and we were going to change what we use or choose between the two, then we would move back to using Check Point exclusively. 

I think that the setup was a bit complex because we have a complex network. Because of that, we had to do some interoperability testing first and that made the initial setup take longer than it would in another, simpler environment.  

The initial setup is one other area that could be simplified.  

We used a partner for the implementation. We ended up having to replace them with a different partner because of installation issues. The second partner was able to fix the issues.  

The costs for the maintenance and subscription for Fortinet FortiOS software alone is actually half of the cost of the hardware. For example, if your hardware costs were about $40,000, your yearly subscription to FortiOS is about $20,000. That is kind of the drawback to using Fortinet. By comparison, that $60,000 is already three years of maintenance or support with Check Point for the same scale setup. It is a significant cost difference.  

I would probably recommend Check Point to most users considering FortiO if they do not have any ACI (Application Centric Infrastructure) implementation or a Cisco ACI. If you could do a workaround on the ACI, then I would probably still recommend Check Point. But if you do not know how to make that type of adjustment or can not and you do not have any partners that need to access your systems, then it is better you go for Fortinet.  

We primarily use the solution for protecting our virtual infrastructure.

The solution needs to adjust its pricing model. With the way they are structured, everything is very disparate and sold separately, and, depending on the solution, it can get quite pricey.

The solution could be more intuitive. Especially when customers have access to it, it's not as simple and straightforward as some of the other devices I've taken a look at.

The solution seems very stable once you have everything up and running. 

The solution is extremely scalable.

Technical support is good. I would rate them nine out of ten.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

It wasn't technical people doing that deployment for the proof of concept, so it took about a day. We also hadn't set up all the features and capabilities. 

We pay $100,000. That covers the cost of the hardware that we run the VN's on. That also includes any SGNA costs for the internal support tech.

We use the private cloud deployment model.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use the solution as a firewall, and in conjunction with Fortinet FortiMail.

The solution is very easy to configure and has a good interface, plus it offers more configuration options than other vendors.

I would like to see fewer bugs. If you use the box with its basic features, the solution is straightforward and stable, but you can run into bugs when using newer features or in more complex use cases. They included a DNS filter as a new feature, and I had issues that required raising a ticket with customer support.

I've been using the solution for between 10 and 12 years.

The solution is very stable. There are occasional bugs, but support is very quick and helpful in resolving these issues.

The initial setup was easy.

A medium 100 or 200 Series box costs around $3000, and the software cost is around 55% of the hardware cost.

Depending on the situation, performance issues may require changing out the box. 

Fortinet's SD-WAN connects the user to the application or app server on-prem or the cloud.

Fortinet has optimized the WAN environment for connecting users to the application.

Fortinet's central management needs to be improved. FortiManager's technical tool provider ability should manage all Fortinet security products. Right now, FortiManager only manages the configuration of FortiGate.

I've been using Fortinet for about five years.

Fortinet's performance is stable.

Fortinet is scalable. We can increase the scalability in the help center. We have 500 to 600 users now, but we plan to grow to 700 or 800 users in the next two years. 

I'm satisfied with Fortinet support.

We switched to Fortinet because it's easy to use and deploy. In recent years, Fortinet has worked to combine the SD-WAN and next-gen firewall into one device, improving the ease of use. 

Setting up Fortinet is straightforward. It takes about 10 to 15 minutes to deploy. We have a team of five engineers to deploy, maintain, and manage Fortinet.

We deployed Fortinet ourselves.

I rate FortiOS nine out of 10. 

We are using Fortinet FortiOS for our multi-level security. For example, we use the SD-WAN feature to protect our data center infrastructure.

There are many useful features, such as web security and advanced threat detection.

The solution could improve by making the dashboard easier to use.

I have been using Fortinet FortiOS for approximately 10 years.

The solution is reliable and stable.

The solution is scalable.

The technical support has been very helpful and they have local language support for Taiwan.

The installation was straightforward.

There is a license required for the solution and the price is fair.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Fortinet FortiOS an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a data center.

Fortinet is very easy to use. I like its configuration and the various functions it offers. 

I think the most common use for a firewall system is web filtering and application filtering. The program has other features too, like anti-virus and other security features, but I think that some of the usage is there to control and connect web filtering and application filtering and to control what comes in and what goes out.

For me, it is important to be able to block VPN applications, like Facebook, so I would like to see that included in the next release. With this version, if you want to block or allow a site, you now have to drag all the domains related to this site. 

The program is very stable.

The scalability is very high.

The customer service is very nice because they answered my questions when I asked them about the program before buying it. The technical support is great too, because they called me back with a solution to my question. 

The initial setup was straightforward and I did it myself. I downloaded it, read the instructions and started the deployment, which took only about an hour. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten and I will definitely recommend it to others because many people are using it around the world now. 

We use this solution as a gateway, a firewall for the office.

More Stability on VPN and SSL Deep Packet Inspection (Compare to Sonicwall)

It is very robust.

Many things are missing from the interface that necessitates using the CLI, so it needs to be improved. When I migrated to FortiGate, there many things that I wanted to do, but couldn't.

With FortiOS, you can use the router in two modes. The first mode is the profile mode, which is the starter mode that most use, but you have another mode that is a policy mode and is required before creating your firewall rule. The problem is that when you switch from one mode to the other, all of your firewall rules will be gone. This means that you have to decide if you want to use the policy mode firewall or a profile mode firewall.

With policy mode, you can have granular control on the application on the firewall rule because the firewall rule works with the source destination protocol. With the application, you have multiple rules, one by one. As an example, you can have one for Skype or one for OneDrive, etc. On the source, you can add a group, and add people to the group, and they can have access to Skype and OneDrive along with others added.

You can granularly control applications on the firewall rule with the policy mode, but you don't have access to the proxy mode rules. There are also issues with the antivirus, IPS, and you are forced to switch back to the profile mode where you have less granular control on the application.

I have problems with the IPS stability and the antivirus in Policy Based Mode. If the file is bigger, then the antivirus doesn't check it.

In policy Based Mode, There are many issues. (Firmware =< 6.4)

I have been using this solution for one year.

We are using the latest version, either 6.4 or 6.5.

This solution is very stable. It is more stable than SonicWall. The biggest difference is the stability on the VPN site to site, and on the DPI SSL for the HTTPS communication.

If you wanted to expand the firewall to another office you would have to use the FortiManager, which I have not used yet.

I have built five routers, one by one.

SonicWall is the same where you have the GMS that can be used to move the rule to the other firewall.

Technical support is not always good.

I can only compare it with SonicWall, and it is missing many advanced features that SonicWall has. SonicWall has multiple advanced features on the DNS, Antivirus, etc...  and a lot of options that don't exist in Fortinet.

With SonicWall, I never had to use the CLI but have had to with Fortinet. They are missing many things on the interface.

FortiGate is like a teenager, where SonicWall is the adult firewall. However, it is more robust than SonicWall, particularly on the VPN site to site and SLL Inspection.

When you build a VPN from site to site, you have to make sure the tunnel you select has the same option on both sides to make it work, but you have to also make sure that the routing exists, the mapping exists, and the firewall role exists. 

If one of them is not there, even if you create a site-to-site VPN with the other side and everything, there is no error, the VPN will not go up. 

On SonicWall, it's different. You build a tunnel, you put the same encryption, the same password on both tunnels, and you click up and it's up. If it's not working, it's because you didn't create yet the firewall rule, you work on the VPN, you click, then connect, and it's up.

Then if it's still not working, you create a firewall rule and it's up, or if you forgot the net rule, etc. You do that step-by-step, and it's working, but unfortunately if one of them has a mistake, even if you have no error on the site-to-site VPN setup, it's not going up.

With SonicWall, you can do it step by step and have it working, but with Fortinet, you have to do it all at the same time with no errors.

I work on the configuration and not really involved in the pricing. It was already in place when the company decided to switch back to Fortinet. 

I concentrate more on security.

I know Fortinet and SonicWall, and If I had to consider other solutions or if I have to redo it again, I would take a closer look with Palo Alto first.

With Palo Alto, the cost is more, but when I switch from SonicWall to Fortinet FortiOS, I lost a lot in the features. I would check to see if Palo Alto has what was lost in terms of features.

The stability is good. I would rate Fortinet FortOS an eight out of ten.

We are a reseller, and I deployed the public cloud version of this solution for a client on Microsoft Azure.

Due to instability of internet here in East Africa ,it will be great if the updates for FortOS could be small and so much size that could utilise more bandwidth.

The most valuable features are the intrusion prevention system and the anti-virus.

The interface is more user-friendly than other products, but moving between the VPN and anti-virus features is not as easy for people who are inexperienced with the solution.

The internet service is not as reliable in East Africa as in other parts of the world, and as such, the bandwidth that is required for updating the Fortinet OS should be reduced. I would like to see smaller and more frequent updates.

So far, the solution has been stable. I have not had any complaints from the customer.

The scalability is one of the great features of this solution.

We did not have to contact technical support.

I have had experience working with Check Point UTM. These products have the same features. However, the user interface and support for Fortinet are superior to Check Point.

The initial setup of this solution was straightforward. The deployment took at most three hours. When the deployment was complete, the only job that was left was for the system administrator on the client's side.

According to our customer, they have not experienced any difficulties.

We handled the deployment of this solution for our customer.

Three people are enough for deployment, with one configuring the network and two working on the systems. 

It is easy to show a return on investment with this solution because it is easy to scale.

The only advice I have for anybody who is implementing this solution to make sure that they have a proper internet connection with good bandwidth.

Overall, the Fortinet OS is great.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.