Fortinet FortiWeb Reviews

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 have multiple environments. Some applications are in Oracle Cloud, some are in Azure, some are in GCP, and some are on-prem. We wanted a single solution for web applications, and that's why we chose FortiWeb. In the case of the cloud, we don't even have to manage it. It's a managed service from Fortinet.

We have not been using it for a very long time. It has only been eight months, and so far, there have been two main benefits. The first benefit is that if I have an on-prem solution, I can buy their hardware and deploy it, but the configuration is the same. If I have a cloud, I can use FortiWeb as a service or as a virtual machine. It depends on requirements, but the configuration remains the same. The configuration doesn't change. We have a lot of global parts and a lot of teams are working on it, so it gets easy to communicate and verify the configuration and create a baseline.

Costing is another benefit. The cost is based on the traffic. If an application is used, we pay for it, but if it's not used, we don't have to pay for it. With other solutions, we have to buy the solution, and then we have to purchase or take licenses. If they aren't used, we are just burning money without any use.

We are using anomaly detection and bot mitigation. In terms of anomaly detection, it is able to find the behavior. We have some applications where normal users are logging from India, and if the behavior changes, it gives us an alert, but in terms of bot mitigation, I haven't found much.

It's easy to use. I don't have to do any changes in my environment. For example, if I use Azure WAF, I have to use a traffic gateway, load balancer, or something similar, whereas, with FortiWeb, I don't have to change any architecture. I just have to change my DNS entry. That's it. If I'm able to change my DNS entry, FortiWeb works.

Adding new applications is also quite easy. You just add the application and change the DNS settings, and you are good to go. Whether you want to block or unblock, or you want the learning mode or protection mode, you can enable or disable it with just one click, and you are good to go. Most of the settings are already there if you want to tweak them. It has a GUI. You must have to click here and there. The documentation is also good. If I don't know something, their documentation is quite helpful. A lot of people are using Fortinet, so YouTube videos and articles are also available.

The configuration part is easy. The configuration and implementation process is streamlined. We don't have to change anything. We don't have to follow 10 processes. It's a single process with which everybody is familiar. Manpower and manhours are saved because a lot of discussions are avoided. It also helps us in creating a baseline. We now have a baseline of what we need. So, from an instant response point of view, it's easy for us because we are getting the same results out of it.

It has reduced false positives. As compared to my old solution, there is at least a 17% to 18% reduction.

It has reduced the number of alerts that our organization receives. There is a 50% to 60% reduction in alerts.

It has saved us time. We were spending around three to four days setting up our old solution, whereas now, we are spending a maximum of four hours.

The ease of configuration is valuable. We have Azure WAF, we have OCI WAF, and we also have Cloud Armor for GCP, but their configuration isn't very easy. It's pretty simple in FortiWeb, and we can enable or configure whatever we want.

Its cost is also good. If I'm using an application for 15 days, I pay only for 15 days.

FortiWeb is good for blocking unknown threats and attacks. I've done a PoC with Azure WAF and OCI WAF, and in comparison, FortiWeb is quite good.

The dashboards are not that configurable. Application-specific dashboards can be improved. If we have 50 applications, there should be something to see what's happening with these 50 applications. There could be a graph or a consolidated alert page where all alerts are inbuilt. They have other products that I can use, but this feature should be built into FortiWeb.

Reporting could also be better. There should be inbuilt reports that we can use to present on how it is benefiting and other things. We should be able to get reports in PDF or other common formats.

It has been around eight months.

Its stability is good. Stability-wise, there aren't any major differences among Azure WAF, OCI WAF, Google Cloud Armor, and Fortinet FortiWeb.

If I'm using FortiWeb as a service, I don't have to care about scaling because everything is taken care of by Fortinet. From a scaling point of view, I don't have to do anything. If it's on-premises, we already know how many users are going to use it, and we can decide on the model accordingly. So far, we haven't had to scale it up for any project.

I've not contacted them for FortiWeb. We are also using Fortinet firewalls for which I've taken their help.

We had our own solution. We called it SecOps. It had something from RedHat and something from OPNsense. We built it that way. We were using that. We switched to FortiWeb because of two reasons. The first reason was the cost, and the second thing was that we wanted a single solution that can be implemented everywhere. We are from R&D. We decide on a solution, and then our product team implements it. When we have multiple tools, operations and maintenance become quite a headache because every tool has its own learning curve. All tools are not the same.

We have on-premises as well as public cloud environments. We have Azure, OCI, and GCP. 

Its initial setup is straightforward. It takes a little bit more time the first time because we have to set up the subscription, etc. Next time, it takes only around four hours.

We implemented it in-house. We are a global team, so a lot of people were involved. From the R&D side, at least five to six people were involved.

In terms of maintenance, when it's on-prem, some sort of maintenance is required in terms of firmware upgrades. We also follow ISO standards, so we have to do maintenance. We have a requirement to check everything once a month, but FortiWeb doesn't take much time.

We have been using it only for eight months, so I need more time to see its price-performance ratio, but it's worth the money. I'm getting what I'm paying for.

There are time savings. Previously, we were spending four to five days setting up our SecOps solution, whereas now, we are spending only four hours.

When I use any other firewall, I have to take a license. It could be a perpetual license or subscription-based. In both cases, we have to pay some amount in advance, whereas in the case of FortiWeb, when using it as a service, I am paying half a dollar only for the domain name, and then I am paying based on the traffic or the number of requests. In every organization, there are some applications that are heavily used, and there are some applications that are not heavily used. So, why go with a yearly, three-yearly, or five-yearly plan when you can just pay based on the traffic that WAF is processing? Previously, for each project, the cost was $800 to $1,000 per application. Now, it's $100 to $120. For some of the applications, there is a 90% reduction, and for some of the applications, there is a 50% reduction. We're paying only $500 to $600.

We checked OCI WAF, Microsoft Azure WAF, Google Cloud Armor, and Fortinet FortiWeb. We also checked other WAF solutions such as Akamai and CloudFlare but didn't do a PoC with them. We did a PoC with OCI WAF, Microsoft Azure WAF, Google Cloud Armor, and Fortinet FortiWeb.

We went for Fortinet FortiWeb because we wanted a single solution that can be implemented anywhere. If we use Azure WAF, it would be hard to use in GCP. We have to create a connection between both, whereas we can implement Fortinet FortiWeb on any cloud. If we have on-prem applications, we can implement FortiWeb hardware as a solution. In some places, we have strict requirements. If it's a VMware data center, they also have the FortiWeb VM solution. If we want to use Docker images, they also provide Docker images. We can just use a single tool. We are not dependent on multiple tools.

Every team has different requirements, but if you need an easy solution that can be deployed in a very short time, FortiWeb is the right one. It doesn't need too much expertise when you're initially configuring it, and even if you're testing it, the cost is quite low. It's good even for small projects.

It has the API gateway functionality, but we aren't using that. We are also not using API discovery and API security. I've enabled machine learning, but we have not used it a lot. We are in the exploring phase.

Overall, I'd rate Fortinet FortiWeb an eight 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.

We are a payment processor with infrastructure deployed across various environments, including AWS, on-prem, and various other environments. We are PCI Level One certified, and one of our requirements is WAF. FortiWeb is a tool we use to secure access to our public-facing applications and services.

Our environment is primarily cloud-based, and all of our services are AWS. We were in the process of migrating to the cloud when we implemented FortiWeb, but we still needed to maintain some on-premise infrastructure to serve different regions. We were happy with the solution after deploying it in the cloud, so we discussed the possibility of also using it with our on-premise applications based on the initial results. Many of those services are now moving to the cloud, so we won't deploy them on-premise anymore. 

We are using FortiWeb across multiple locations in London and Singapore, so we have WAF services sitting in front of applications across both sites. Our applications include various payment processing platforms, fraud prevention tools, and other related customer-facing services based in various locations within the AWS cloud.

A ten-person network team is responsible for administering FortiWeb. It's difficult to say precisely how many end-users there are because we provide this solution to third parties, but around 160 clients connect to the applications behind these services. Our clients are typically small or medium-sized enterprises.

FortiWeb provides an additional layer of security that we didn't have previously. We have a next-generation firewall deployed in our cloud infrastructure, but the WAF is the most external-facing piece. The WAF passes traffic to our internal next-generation firewalls.

We have also benefited from FortiWeb's load-balancing capabilities. FortiWeb enables us to load-balance without the need to take on an additional service. In most cases, we've been able to use load balancing provided by the AWS gateway. We have two servers with services deployed across multiple availability zones behind there. In addition to security, WAF allows us to load balance traffic across those servers in various availability zones without adding more load balancers.

FortiWeb streamlines tasks because we've eliminated other functions like load balancing. The API is also excellent. Someone on my team created an application that integrates with the API to quickly add new IP addresses without changing the templates. We've found it's helped us streamline some of our usual BAU tasks.

We already had a low false positive rate, but FortiWeb has lowered it further. Detections in our report tend to be accurate. We still get occasional false positives, but some of that probably relates to our custom-built applications. FortiWeb decreased our false positives by around 30 percent. 

We used to get a lot of alerts from our traditional firewall, but the number has declined significantly since deploying FortiWeb. It was a reduction of about 70 to 80 percent. The alerts coming from FortiWeb are helpful. They inform us of things that require action. We previously got many alerts from our public-facing services. We didn't have an efficient means of getting alerts. The same threat provided multiple alerts. That would keep going and could be overwhelming at times.

FortiWeb's ease of deployment is what we liked the most about it. Implementing FortiWeb was extremely fast and easy, which was a significant advantage. It comes with several preconfigured rule sets and templates. 

FortiWeb effectively addressed unknown threats. We get regular reports that we check. So far, we've had no issues at all. Around 99 percent of our public-facing infrastructure is restricted by source IP to our partners' networks, so our attack surface is restricted. WAF picked up and blocked any attacks before they can impact us. 

FortiWeb is effortless to use and manage. The documentation is excellent, which is another huge advantage. The layout is logical and intuitive. You can create templates and reapply them to new applications, so we don't need to do a fresh configuration for each application. We have a template that represents our security benchmark. There are a few exceptions that we need to add for each application, but we can redeploy the security benchmark template for each new application that we create.

One area that needs improvement is using IP addresses within templates. If you allow an IP address to access an application, you should be able to leave a description of that. For example, we allow clients to access these services, and some are restricted to the IP address. When you add an IP, there's no way within the product to say what the IP address is. 

We need to maintain a separate external list because we need to remove any IP address associated with a client if they stop using our services. In many other products, you can create an object specifying that this IP address is for a client of this name or this service. You don't have this ability within FortiWeb. 

Another area for improvement is logging. When troubleshooting, the logs sometimes take a while to update. We've had people report that some things aren't logged if they're successful. It's a bit hit-and-miss. For example, sometimes people access one of our services, and it's successful, but we don't see that in the logs. 

I've been using FortiWeb for around 18 months. 

FortiWeb is highly stable. I can't recall an instance when we've had any issues. Our services are used constantly. For example, we have a fraud prevention tool that various banks and FinTech companies access, and FortiWeb is deployed behind it. We've never had a problem with availability due to FortiWeb. The solution is 100 percent stable and available. 

I'm satisfied with FortiWeb's scalability. It's always met the needs of our applications. We can deploy it in any application that we want to deploy behind. 

I rate Fortinet support an eight out of ten. The technical support has gotten better. There were a few difficulties when we first raised some calls. It was a new product, and we weren't getting clarity on whether some of the actions we asked about were possible. Initially, the response was also a bit slow. We chalked that up to the fact that we were early adopters of the product. The support has improved since then, and we're happy with it today. 

Positive

We didn't have a WAF solution, but we used Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls. While these firewalls had many WAF capabilities, they weren't considered WAF products. 

Our main reason for deploying a WAF solution was to satisfy regulatory requirements. To get a PCI Level One certification, we need a WAF on some of these public-facing services. FortiWeb Cloud ticked all the boxes and met our requirements.

I initially deployed a lot of the applications. It was so quick and easy. FortiWeb took about a week to deploy, including assessment and testing. We had to create a new environment. Much of our on-premise infrastructure was closed off in the past, so we required no WAF for regulatory compliance. 

To create this new environment, we onboarded some new services that were classified within the scope of PCI. They were deployed in the old way with firewalls. However, our QSA said we needed to have services behind the WAF, and we were being assessed in a week. We had to find and deploy a WAF before we were audited. 

I have a team, but I and one other engineer were involved in the deployment. After the setup, FortiWeb requires minimal maintenance, which is one aspect we like about it. We've occasionally had to open a support ticket for the odd bug that's come up. There's typically no maintenance on our end. I can't think of a time when we've had issues with availability from FortiWeb. 

It's hard to calculate an ROI monetarily.  Some of the services we provide based on FortiWeb are charged to the clients. I can't say much about it from that perspective. However, we've seen benefits from a time and resource perspective. Also, having a cloud-based WAF means we don't need to maintain the infrastructure, and we can quickly deploy new applications. We derive a massive value from the reusable templates. 

We also save money and resources because we don't need to deploy more EC2 instances or use additional products for load balancing and other functions. That's potentially an 80 percent reduction in those costs.  

FortiWeb is transparent about how much each application costs. When you create an application, it will tell you the estimated cost. The licensing is clear, so we can see that we're getting a good value. 

We're satisfied with the price. Our organization sometimes questions if we're getting our money's worth, but we get a decent value from FortiWeb for the price. Everyone on our team and within the infrastructure area is happy with it.

I'm the network team lead, so I assessed and deployed FortiWeb. I looked at several options. I knew the Fortinet brand but was unfamiliar with FortiWeb WAF. After researching it, I recognized that it was potentially a product that we could use. I did a demo and found that it ticked all the boxes.

I rate Fortinet FortiWeb a nine out of ten. I would definitely recommend the solution. FortiWeb is rich in security features and additional features like load balancing. It's one of the best products we use. 

It's easy and quick to deploy. The documentation is excellent. We are pleased with the product and see it as an integral part of deploying new applications in the cloud or on-premises efficiently.

We use FortiWeb as our web application firewall. 

FortiWeb provides the level of security we need at an excellent price point. It's easy to deploy and operationally efficient. FortiWeb enables us to streamline tasks. It's a robust solution that's effortless to configure. The AI and machine learning features help us block unknown threats. 

We can bring our web applications online faster because FortiWeb shortens the time needed to bring any application into production. Compared to other application firewalls, FortiWeb has a smoother process for bringing applications online. 

FortiWeb has few false positives. It's more accurate than other solutions, so we also see fewer alerts. FortiWeb has helped free up IT staff for other projects. You don't need to spend much time getting applications ready for the web, so IT staff can use this time to manage other things. 

The AI engine and machine learning features distinguish FortiWeb from other solutions. It has a robust UI. FortiWeb is solidly accurate and provides excellent protection against zero-day attacks using machine learning. It appears to be effective because we've never experienced a breach from a zero-day attack. 

We use almost all of the features, including analytics, malware detection, bot mitigation, and API discovery.

I think customers have the impression that FortiWeb is primarily for SMEs, but FortiWeb should work to expand its market share and adjust its branding. F5 and some other firewalls are easier to customize. FortiWeb could be more flexible and customizable. The documentation could also be improved because many of the advanced features aren't fully documented. 

We have used FortiWeb for around a year.

FortiWeb is highly stable. We haven't seen any bugs. The solution is reliable once configured properly.

FortiWeb isn't difficult to scale.

I rate Fortinet support six out of 10. The documentation and support need improvement. 

Neutral

We have used Citrix WAF and the F5. FortiWeb offers most of the same features at a better price. 

I have done on-prem, hybrid, and cloud deployments of FortiWeb. The deployment was straightforward for most features, but a few features require some customization and configuration in the console. That's where we ran into problems because the documentation isn't thorough in some areas.

It takes around three or four days to deploy FortiWeb for a simple website. It takes longer for a complex website, but it depends on the level of complexity. We deployed FortiWeb in-house with two people and some help from Fortinet support. It's deployed across multiple data centers and locations.

The price-performance ratio is good. The time to value is quick because it's easy to deploy and the ML engine doesn't take long to adjust and apply the correct rules. 

FortiWeb offers these services at a price that SME customers can afford, but it's also suitable for large enterprises. Still, they need to put in more work to gain a greater share of enterprise business because they face stiff competition in this segment from F5, Cloudflare, and some others. 

I rate Fortinet FortiWeb eight out of 10. FortiWeb is a suitable product for SMEs. I recommend a proof of concept before going forward with any project.

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 the solution as a web access firewall (WAF) to secure our applications and use URL mapping to ensure only traffic filtered through the WAF is allowed. 

The environment the product is used in is one project in our GCP, and we're located in the Western USA. Two members of the infrastructure team operate FortiWeb within our organization.

FortiWeb filters a lot of unwanted traffic, which is good for our organization, as it would negatively impact our reputation if this traffic weren't screened.

The solution helps us to streamline tasks as it features a user-friendly console, and we can apply the WAF to all the URLs required for our publicly available applications. The templates offer either advanced or extended protection for those URLs, and we can see insights for specific URLs, such as total hits and how many requests are being blocked and allowed.  

The FortiWeb Cloud also saved our organization time through machine learning, which analyses traffic based on IP origin and geographic region. This is one of the solution's better features and saved us significant time. 

We have seen time to value with the product. After implementation, we let the solution run for a month, then reconfigured a few policies and templates. Within three months, we were getting the desired results.  

The policies and the filtering are the most valuable features, especially traffic, URL, and application filtering. The solution is excellent at detecting vulnerabilities. 

The product is great for blocking unknown threats and attacks. We've had excellent results over the past two years, and the way it detects and filters traffic is outstanding.  

The FortiWeb Cloud is straightforward to use; with a basic overview of how to apply policies, create NAT rules, etc., it's easy. The console is user-friendly enough that anyone can create and apply policies. 

The solution also helped reduce our false positives by 20-25%. 

Our organization receives fewer alerts thanks to the solution, and we don't have to think about the security of the URLs for applications. We put the whole domain behind the WAF, and if it's configured correctly from the beginning, we spend minimal time making changes and get the precise results we need. Our alerts have been reduced by approximately 5%.  

We want to see more detailed logging, such as audit logging, as this would significantly enhance the solution's reporting. We currently get some information from logs, but more would be better.

We've been using the solution for nearly two years. 

The solution is very stable. 

The product is scalable; we can easily scale up and down as required. 

I did the initial setup, which was very straightforward; the process includes putting an instance in the cloud and then adding the URLs of the domains to the template. The initial deployment took under two hours, but we needed to spend time reconfiguring the template later to reduce the number of false positives. One staff member can complete the setup, and it only requires basic knowledge.

Outside of updates and the initial reconfiguration, the solution requires minimal maintenance. 

The pricing is average; the product is neither particularly expensive nor affordable. 

Regarding the price-performance ratio, the solution is definitely worth the money.

I rate the tool nine out of ten. 

I advise anyone evaluating the solution to carry out a POC and recommend it overall.

We use the templates available in the Fortinet Web Cloud or WAF, which is sufficient to provide extended protection, traffic filtering, request blocking, and virus detection. 

Fortinet is our only WAF application because we've had excellent experiences with it. If any project requires security checks, we go with the solution.

FortiWeb is used for protecting against malicious activities, such as SQL injections, for outward-facing web forms.

The most valuable features of FortiWeb include its dashboard and out-of-the-box integrations with other Fortinet products, which enhance its effectiveness. FortiWeb's position as part of the Fortinet platform makes it particularly beneficial for Fortinet customers, offering seamless integration and operational cost savings.

There is room for improvement in the portability on multi-cloud environments. Enhanced DDoS integration to make FortiWeb more unified with other Fortinet products could be beneficial.

I have personally been working with FortiWeb for approximately two years.

I would rate the stability of FortiWeb as nine out of ten, indicating highly stable performance.

I would rate the scalability of the product a seven out of ten. While it is multicloud-enabled, there is more automation in other products that may better suit complex environments.

I would rate the customer service and support as nine out of ten.

Positive

Our team, consisting of three certified Fortinet engineers, handles the deployment, although globally, Exclusive Networks has a large team of certified engineers.

Operational costs decrease when using FortiWeb within the Fortinet stack due to integrated assessments and security event management.

I would rate the licensing cost as seven out of ten, considering it good value for money. The price is affordable and reasonable for the features offered.

We also work with other vendors such as F5, Proofpoint, and Palo Alto, however, Fortinet stands out for its holistic vision of cybersecurity.

Overall, I would rate FortiWeb an eight out of ten for existing Fortinet customers due to its seamless integration and good value for money.