Our company uses the solution to protect websites from SQL injection and excessive attacks on Layer 7.
We have 500 users throughout our company.
Our company uses the solution to protect websites from SQL injection and excessive attacks on Layer 7.
We have 500 users throughout our company.
The solution is very easy to use with little instruction.
The anti-defacement feature is very useful because it looks for web changes over time to protect pages.
A better load balancer is needed when multiple servers are used for the same website.
A dynamic routing protocol needs to be included with the next release.
The solution does not handle batch migration as well as F5 Advanced WAF.
I have been using the solution for five years and serve as an instructor.
The version we use is stable and reliable with no issues.
It has been reported that the latest version has some stability issues.
The solution is scalable.
Scalability always depends on usability. For example, using the solution for an industrial company that has an internal product is very different than using the solution for a bank that has 10,000 internal users and 1 million customers.
I score scalability an eight for the solution, a nine for F5 Advanced WAF, and a ten for Avi Networks.
Technical support has been great and has a vast knowledge base with quick response times.
The initial setup is very easy.
Initial configurations take a maximum of four hours.
The solution was implemented in-house.
The solution is very inexpensive when compared to F5 Advanced WAF and Avi Networks but offers the same benefits.
Our one-year license is $24,000 Canadian and includes all users. We are very satisfied with the solution's licensing strategy.
F5 Advanced WAF includes more features and scalability than the solution but is very expensive. With an unlimited budget, F5 is the better choice.
The solution includes many of F5's features but is inexpensive.
It is important as part of your regular process to update any tools including the solution. Versions are built in other countries so it is a good idea to ensure you are using the latest, gold-standard version for your area. For example, check for direct internet access, review active directory authentications, and configure users, servers, and certificates.
The solution is super easy to use, is inexpensive, and includes great technical support.
We use FortiWeb to connect external APIs to our on-prem data center solutions.
We use FortiWeb for extended protection profiles to mitigate SQL injection and other web application threats. It is effective against web application threats and helps with our API protection and load balancing.
Additionally, it is cost-effective compared to other solutions.
They could integrate some kind of machine learning and AI facilities to automate workflows. We need to update regular patches frequently, and it requires regular installation and testing of these patches.
We have been working with FortiWeb for almost five years.
It is stable for us, showing good performance in handling web security.
I would rate its scalability at six because we have to increase our CPU and memory capacities, as it is confined to CPU and memories.
I would rate the customer service and technical support between eight and nine out of ten.
Positive
The setup is easy to manage.
It helps us save costs, about 20% to 30%.
In comparison to other solutions, the price is reasonable.
FortiWeb is suitable for medium-scale companies. I recommend using this solution.
I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.
I use the solution in my company, as we mostly load some web applications at our data center and use it to ensure that the web pages are properly secured.
Actually, most of the features of the tool are really good, but I would like to emphasize the importance of its machine learning features, as it can be implemented smoothly in Fortinet FortiWeb, and it is very helpful for our company.
Though the reporting is a nice aspect associated with the tool, I feel that it has certain shortcomings and can be made better. The reporting part can provide more information and be more specific.
Fortinet FortiWeb's admin guide could offer more, like, examples or features on how to implement the tool. It can provide information on how a user can make use of it in different usages, and that can help a lot. The admin guide is satisfactory, and it meets our company's needs.
Actually, my company would like it if the product could implement scanning attachments for exchange for assets or exchange needs. The aforementioned area consists of the feature that my company wants to apply, but it is not supported in Fortinet yet. My company needs the product to support us in the aforementioned area, and it can help us a lot by providing a layer of security that can check files and attachments in emails and other stuff, which would be great.
I have been using Fortinet FortiWeb for three years. I am an end user of the solution.
Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
In terms of stability, it is a good solution that is easy to use and has many features and resources. The support offered by the product is good, especially since the support team responds on time, keeps you informed, and even follows up. Generally, it is a good solution to have and use.
My company has not experienced any downtime while using the product.
In our company, we have not implemented the product on a large scale.
Around 2,000 people per month use the product in our company.
Every single day, the tool is used to host web applications.
If our company needs to implement more hosted web servers, we will use Fortinet FortiWeb, but if not, then it will remain at the current number. Increasing the use of the tool is not my decision, and I just accommodate the needs of the organization.
The solution's technical support is good. When my company faced some problems with the product, I found the solution's support team to be very supportive and helpful. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.
Positive
On a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the product's initial setup phase as eight or nine.
The product's initial setup phase was straightforward, and since our company didn't have any problems with it, we didn't encounter many problems with the tool. Maybe our company encountered some problems with the product's setup because we used to use it to set up the servers or stuff, which took time, but now Fortinet FortiWeb handles everything smoothly and easily.
The solution is deployed on an on-premises version.
The solution can be deployed in a week.
If my company did not have Fortinet FortiWeb, then I believe that we would have had to host some of the services in an external data center with extra fees and there we would have had to pay for the web services, but we don't need that anymore because now, we have an on-prem web service that can promote us to be able to host as much as we need of web services.
On a scale of one to ten, where one is zero percent and ten is a hundred percent, I rate the ROI as an eight.
If one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the product price as three or four. The tool is cost-effective and offers value for money. I didn't mean it was very expensive. The price is fixed, but some features need an extra license.
My company was considering F5, but you actually went for Fortinet FortiWeb after considering the cost aspect.
My company doesn't specifically host e-commerce platforms since we offer mainly government services.
The security part has been satisfactory till now, and we haven't faced any problems yet.
FortiGate FortiWeb's features that have been most effective in mitigating web-based threats are possible because of the signatures. My company doesn't need to enforce a lot of policies or stuff. Fortinet FortiWeb has a lot of internal databases that can help you, and you can use whatever platform you are hosting your web applications through whichever software you use. it can build up a web protection profile that matches your needs, making it a very helpful tool.
Speaking about how machine learning features enhance our security posture, I would say that some aspects of the website are not normally clear for our company, and machine learning helps in such areas. It just traces the normal usage of the web applications along with the websites or links most users visit while also checking which URLs are mostly used, after which the tool differentiates between the normal usage and any abnormalities, based on which it builds the model that can be used to improve the security. Sometimes, a person cannot do things manually and is not sure about all the aspects of our web applications because many are not developers. Machine learning comes into the picture because one may not know all the stuff associated with the product.
A team of four or five people is enough to deploy the tool. Maintaining the tool is actually not a very big task and not many people are required for it.
The integration capabilities of the product with other security tools have benefited our company's security strategy as it sits smoothly in our network. The tool doesn't cause any problems with the integration part.
I would recommend that users use the tool's high availability. With the tool, one box is not enough, so there is a need to have a cluster of two boxes. Users need to measure their needs regarding the logging process and everything else, including processing. Even before starting to use it, we have to set up everything, or you would be confused about how to use the tool in the future, and it would be difficult to figure out how much retention log retention we would need in our company. It is important to set up everything related to the users' needs so that they don't need to change a lot of settings in the future.
I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
Fortinet FortiWeb's use case is associated with WAF or web application firewall. Before a platform faces the internet, Fortinet FortiWeb inspects the traffic.
Fortinet FortiWeb is much cheaper compared to other solutions like the ones from F5 Networks, which have more capabilities. I think Fortinet FortiWeb is not as capable as F5 Networks, but it is cheaper. The key point for Fortinet FortiWeb is that when I give it to the customers, I see it is cheaper than F5 Networks.
All the players in the market are already using AI. In the AI area, I don't find any specific feature for Fortinet FortiWeb that is special compared to the other products in the market.
Fortinet FortiWeb's ML features are good, but they do not make the tool any special because all the products in the market, like F5 Networks, already use AI features. The AI feature does not make Fortinet FortiWeb any special.
The tool's WAF or web application firewall area has certain aspects that can be improved. I cannot find what features superficially can be improved in the WAF area of the tool.
Fortinet FortiWeb can be applicable for small or big networks. In my opinion, Fortinet FortiWeb can manage or improve its log management capabilities. As far as I know, FortiGate has a limit, which means it can be used for logging for seven days, and maybe it is because Fortinet wants to speed up the selling of another product called FortiAnalyzer. FortiAnalyzer is a device dedicated to logging analytic solutions. Fortinet may limit the capability of logging in Fortinet devices so that customers buy FortiAnalyzer for log analytics.
I have been using Fortinet FortiWeb for three years. My company is a reseller of the solution.
I don't know about the tool's scalability.
I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.
Positive
I also use FortiAuthenticator.
The product's initial setup phase can be somewhat complex depending on what software needs to be protected by Fortinet FortiWeb. If the web application is simple, the configuration can be made simple. If there is any specific need to protect the area in the web application, it is more tricky to configure Fortinet FortiWeb. It depends on what kind of web application needs to be protected by Fortinet FortiWeb. Overall, the tool's configuration is neither easy nor difficult.
If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool an eight.
The product's document says that Forinet FortiWeb can detect zero-day attacks, but it needs more devices like FortiSandbox for help. Fortinet FortiWeb needs to be integrated with FortiSandbox. I think it is Fortinet's strategy to upsell other tools because Fortinet doesn't want to put the solution in one box or one device. If you want another feature, Fortinet wants you to buy another box.
I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
We sell a SaaS product deployed on the Azure cloud platform using Kubernetes. We offer a bundle of cloud-based services. The Azure firewall solution is too expensive, so we need to find an alternative solution.
We are currently testing FortiWeb in a QA environment and plan to deploy it on top of our SaaS product. We are about 95 percent covered now, but we still need to work out some technical details. I believe we will be ready to deploy it into production in the next few months.
We currently are using Azure's WAF solution, but it is a little bit expensive for a startup project. The Azure firewall has limited configuration options that aren't helpful in our use case. FortiWeb is easier to configure and has pay-as-you-go pricing based on traffic, which is ideal for a startup company. Once our product starts having steadier traffic, switching to something with fixed pricing might make more sense. Currently, it's a risk for the company.
It's too soon to say what other benefits we'll see from FortiWeb because we're still in the testing phase. We've watched some training presentations, and we're still working on a strategy for how we'll use the tool. Once we have a clear plan, we'll put it into development, configure the template, and deploy it into production when it's ready.
it isn't in production. If the developers say a setting isn't working, we adjust the firewall rule, the goal is complete the template before going into production.
I like FortiWeb's usability and ease of configuration. It's simple to configure rules and exceptions inside the attack log. We block everything by default. If something isn't working, we ask the system admin to adjust the template and add exceptions. I'm interested in the AI attack pattern-matching feature, but we haven't tested it yet.
API is another feature that we haven't used in production, but I'm generally pleased that FortiWeb has this ability, and we can customize our application how we want.
We use Kubernetes, so I would like to have a plugin to configure FortiWeb Cloud automatically using Kubernetes Ingress. That would reduce the complexity of setting up an Ingress object in Kubernetes. Some competing solutions help you configure Ingress and Kubernetes automatically.
We have been testing FortiWeb for the last four months.
FortiWeb seems to be stable so far.
FortiWeb features automatic scaling because it's in the cloud, so scaling up is easy.
I rate Fortinet support an eight out of ten. We have only contacted them with a few questions, and they responded promptly.
Positive
In recent years, we've spent money on various projects that required us to protect applications. We have the Azure firewall deployed, and we paid a third-party SOC company to monitor it for attacks. It didn't offer out-of-the-box complete protection easy to customize, so we configure it for watching threats and raised alerts, that's means additional effort.
We feel that FortiWeb is a better way to go than Azure Web Firewall in our scenario because FortiWeb has some advantages in pricing and features. It's easier to configure and maintain. Also, FortiWeb uses templates.
There was no initial setup because it's a SaaS solution. We only needed to configure it for our environment. The configuration was straightforward and only took a couple of hours. The only maintenance required is updating the templates.
I would like to use the product based on our initial testing, so I think it's a sound investment.
We still don't know what the real cost will be because the pricing is based on traffic, and the solution isn't in production. However, we expect it to be cheaper than the Azure Web Firewall.
I rate Fortinet FortiWeb an eight out of ten.
The primary use case involves using FortiWeb to protect web servers from various malicious activities by integrating it into a firewall with features like URL filtering and application control. Additionally, it was deployed to meet the requirements of PCI DSS.
FortiWeb has been helpful in securing our web servers effectively. Fortinet FortiWeb is reliable, providing seamless protection and peace of mind regarding the security of our web applications.
FortiWeb has antivirus, web filtering, and application control features. Being part of the next-generation firewall, it's highly effective in ensuring security. The capability to protect from malicious activities is significant, alongside other features like application control.
I cannot provide feedback on what needs improvement as I haven't used other solutions to compare it against and therefore cannot identify any areas lacking in FortiWeb. Overall, FortiWeb is reliable.
It's been a year since I last used FortiWeb, while I previously configured and used it actively.
FortiWeb is reliable in terms of stability. There haven't been specific downtimes or technical issues with FortiWeb.
We haven’t encountered issues necessitating contact with customer service for FortiWeb, implying stable support from Fortinet.
Neutral
I have no experience with other solutions.
The initial setup depends on familiarity with the product. It's manageable with the right expertise. In cases of a simple application, setting up could be achieved in as little as one day.
I can't determine the exact cost of licensing as it was part of a bundle that offered multiple features and licenses.
I have no experience with other solutions.
I must emphasize the reliability.
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.
We use it for all our hosted web applications, so they are routed via FortiWave and Fortinet. We use both the network firewall and the application firewall. The whole infrastructure and everything else are protected. Fortinet protects the web infrastructure.
There are very few specific things that are not present in cloud-native firewalls, like Azure Firewall or AWS Firewall. They lack many features, such as the ability to handle paths in requests larger than eight KB. For example, if you upload a document or the page size exceeds eight KB, you might face issues with AWS and other cloud-native firewalls. FortiWeb can handle requests of up to 10MB, providing this capability. It also has a very user-friendly UI. Even someone new to FortiWeb or any firewall system, with the right contextual knowledge, can configure it effectively. The support and documentation provided by Fortinet are generally sufficient for any team to manage infrastructure using Fortinet and FortiWeb.
Native cloud firewalls, like AWS WAF or Azure Firewall, have limitations compared to next-generation firewalls like Fortinet FortiWeb or other solutions. While AWS and Azure have security features, they are often tailored to their specific technologies and may lack some advanced capabilities in next-generation firewalls. This is why we sometimes opt for solutions like Fortinet, even in a cloud environment.
Fortinet FortiWeb has strengths, but there is room for improvement. For example, its threat intelligence capabilities may not be as advanced as some competitors. While Fortinet excels in many areas, it could enhance its advanced intelligence features. However, in terms of configuration, maintenance, and securing infrastructure, Fortinet remains a strong option.
I have been using Fortinet FortiWeb as a partner for five to five years.
I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.
It is suitable for enterprises.
I rate the solution’s scalability as seven or eight out of ten.
We have a procurement team and a support engagement team that is helping us with issues. They are maintaining the SLA and all those things.
Deployment can be straightforward, like spinning up EC2 instances or Azure VMs with Fortinet, which can be a one-click process. The complexity arises from configuring Fortinet within your specific ecosystem. The configuration depends on the size and nature of your infrastructure, including the number of machines and appliances and the types of systems you are protecting, such as APIs, normal instances, or mobile applications. While deploying Fortinet itself might be quick, configuring it to fit your environment and security needs takes additional time and effort.
Many other companies offer similar capabilities. We also use other solutions, but Fortinet FortiWeb has strong bot capabilities for threat protection and excellent geo-restriction features. It also handles malicious IP prevention and is easy to use. Our experience has been positive. We’ve only enabled the algorithms provided by FortiWeb and haven’t customized the configuration beyond what FortiWeb offers. The existing rules and features for FortiWeb are good.
If you need a next-generation firewall to meet industry and security demands, relying solely on native cloud firewalls like Azure Firewall, AWS Firewall, or Google Cloud Firewall may not be sufficient. These native firewalls often lack the advanced features to protect against various threats. It is advisable to consider solutions like Fortinet FortiWeb or Cloudflare to ensure robust protection.
It's a trade-off between price and the service you receive. If you're paying less for a solution that provides good services compared to a competitor where you might pay more for similar support and features, then Fortinet could be a viable option. It might be better if another solution, like Cloudflare, offers better value across multiple aspects such as service, cost, and support.
Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
We're using the Fortinet FortiWeb firewall to front-end the production and test applications we run on Azure. We're an Azure environment, and it front-ends those applications.
We currently aren't using any of the advanced features.
Fortinet FortiWeb has given us a more cost-effective security solution. Because it's a software-as-a-service or infrastructure type of platform, we've been able to replace our dedicated hardware platforms. It has given us more flexibility to be able to utilize it as a service.
It has minimized the number of technical resources and the amount of time that we've had to dedicate to setting up and managing the front-end firewall capability. From that standpoint, it has saved us time. I don't know exactly how machine learning is attached to that, but if that had anything to do with the simplification and the ability to give us the information we need reporting-wise, then it has helped us with that.
It has allowed us to not spend as many resources on trying to manage the setups that we used to have to do in the past on the security side. It has taken care of that, so at a higher level, we can manage and configure that. It has reduced some of the time that the staff spent on that, but it's hard to measure the time saved.
Some of the threat detection analytics and the filtering capabilities they give us for filtering a certain type of information that we don't want coming into the site are its valuable features. The analytics are pretty good in terms of being able to see what threats have been detected and mitigated, where they're coming from, and things like that. That has allowed us to do some additional filtering because by looking at threats, we can apply additional filters and try to minimize some of them.
Fortinet FortiWeb works well for what we do and what we use it for. It's fairly easy to use, easy to set up, and easy to monitor. It's easy to configure, monitor, and manage.
Their documentation is fairly complete, but it's sometimes a little bit difficult to search for exactly what you're looking for to resolve an issue. There have been times when we've gone to try to search for areas that we needed to get information on, and it has not always been extremely clear exactly how a particular thing needs to be set up. It sometimes takes a little bit of research to dig into figuring out exactly what it is. More examples would be helpful on what they have. The information sometimes doesn't relate directly to the state of the product at the time, so examples would be helpful.
We've been using this solution for a little over a year.
It has been very good. In the time we've had it, we've had only one issue when they had some sort of outage for themselves that affected us. That was the only one that I've encountered so far.
We haven't done a lot on scaling, but just from configuring the product and looking at it, it appears to be fairly good at scaling. It appears to be fairly or moderately simple to set up for scaling, but we haven't done a lot of scaling with it yet.
It's an in-house hosted web application environment that we utilize. We probably have around 500 to 1,000 people using it. We use it within our company environment. We've anywhere from 500 to 1,000 people depending on the customers that we have linked into it.
I've contacted their tech support. For the times that I contacted them, they were very helpful. I'd rate them seven out of ten.
Neutral
We did have some specific hardware firewall solutions that were in place at data centers. When we went to the cloud for our applications, we wanted to move to a cloud-based front-end firewall infrastructure. We didn't want to be managing the hardware at locations.
It was fairly straightforward. It was fairly easy to implement, but the documentation with some examples might have made it simpler. Overall, it was fairly easy to get the initial implementation in place and get things worked out.
We did it all in-house. We had probably three people for its implementation.
It requires minimal maintenance. We probably have two people involved in the maintenance.
We have seen an ROI. The previous hardware solutions we had were fairly expensive. They had a higher cost of maintenance and actual manual support because we had to support the infrastructure and we had to support the product itself. By FortiWeb providing us with a service solution that does that, we're not managing hardware. We're not investing in the hardware upfront, and we're not providing the labor to maintain and install that particular part of it. The only thing we focus on now is the setup and then the constant monitoring of what goes on and any actions we need to take as we move forward. It has helped us in that sense because we don't have the ongoing hardware licensing and hardware infrastructure that we have to mess with. So, it has definitely been a more cost-effective solution.
So far, I have been pretty pleased with the way it's priced and licensed. The way it's done makes it easy, especially for an organization like us, so I've been pleased with the way it's priced and licensed right now.
We didn't evaluate any cloud-based products. We've used Cisco products and Meraki products in the past, but they all were hardware products. When we were looking for a software solution, I had gotten a recommendation for the product from another person I worked with in the past. That person was using it and mentioned to me that I should give it a try. That's how I got into it. It was through a referral. Once I got it and tested it, it seemed like a pretty good product for what we needed, so that's how we went with it.
Fortinet FortiWeb seems to have worked well for blocking unknown threats and attacks. It hasn't necessarily helped us streamline anything, but it has simplified how we provide the front-end firewall capability.
It has reduced false positives to some degree. It tries to identify those to tell us what are the different threats, but it's hard to provide metrics without measuring what false positives might have been there. However, I do know that the reporting that it gives can identify that.
Similarly, I don't know if it has reduced the number of alerts. However, I do know that it has allowed us to categorize and understand what types of threats we get. From the threat alerts, we get to know whether they're alerts we should be concerned about or whether they're just alerts notifying us that those are things that have come in that it has taken care of. So, I don't know if it has really reduced them as much as it has helped us to understand what they are and be able to focus more on if there are alerts that we need to take action on and investigate, or whether they're alerts for things that have been taken care of and we don't necessarily have to spend any time on.
Overall, I'd rate Fortinet FortiWeb an eight out of ten for what it does.