Fortinet FortiWeb Reviews

I used FortiWeb, and I was looking if the SIPTNA from Symantec had something to do with the one from Fortinet. I am a consultant and I propose Fortinet products to my customers. I usually recommend FortiWeb for companies that are looking for a WAF.

It's really easier for them to integrate. Sometimes we help them, and once it's integrated, it doesn't have a lot of requirements from their side. They just have to keep the site going with their security assessment. They do not need for us to help them more.

Usually, people want to change, solutions and we recommend that it is easy to use. Even though most products have the same functionality nowadays, FortiWeb is easy to integrate.

Fortinet's technical support is pretty slow, especially when you have quick questions. The support kind of delays itself and sometimes takes more time. That's the only thing that I can think of at the moment.

Fortinet's technical support is pretty slow and kind of delays itself when you have quick questions.

I was using another solution. I just wanted to research it to see if it had something extra. It was just some research for a project. I just wanted to know if any of them had some qualities that seemed similar to Symantec.

It's true that we are the ones that usually deploy it for our clients. Since we do it for many of them, we think it's really easy. But as for many products, it's really straightforward.

We are the ones that usually deploy it for our clients. Since we do it for many of them, we think it's really easy.

It's better. Yeah, it's really good. It's one of the main points why we offer it. Since we are partners with them, sometimes we offer our customers a lower price.

The clients that we know use both FortiWeb and Symantec. I used FortiWeb, and I was looking if the SIPTNA from Symantec had something to do with the one from Fortinet.

I would recommend FortiWeb for web application security. Most products work the same despite being different solutions.

I'd rate the solution nine 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.

The solution's most valuable feature is its security profile. 

The solution could improve its ease of use and add more advanced WAF features in future releases.

I have been working with the product for more than five years. 

I've worked with both F5 and Fortinet and find F5 to be much better. F5 is easier to implement, more compatible with applications, and more robust and stable. Regarding securing applications behind the WAF, F5 generally provides better security.

The solution's implementation is not complex and depends on the number and complexity of customers' applications. 

Fortinet FortiWeb's pricing is reasonable. Its licensing costs are yearly. 

The product has been in the WAF business for a long time. Its maturity cannot be compared to other alternatives. Based on my experience with Fortinet FortiWeb, I'd recommend it in specific cases, especially if you have a limited budget. It can meet basic requirements. However, other vendors have better features and support. I rate the overall product a six out of ten. 

We use the solution for branch optimization. Initially, it was all in MPLS, but they converted to the broadband network. Implementing it reduced the cost, and its redundancy was also better.

It improves latency by optimizing traffic routing. When a better link is available, it reroutes traffic through it. Additionally, MPLS helps reduce costs. Critical data can be prioritized on MPLS, while other data uses broadband connectivity, leading to better resource utilization. This setup supports load sharing, allowing multiple links to work simultaneously for improved performance.

From the web application perspective, it offers comprehensive features, including URL filtering and DNS protection. Additionally, FortiWeb provides SD-WAN capabilities, such as load sharing based on latency or packet drops. Its extensive feature set allows customers to choose and customize according to their needs and preferences.

FortiWeb could have an inbound load balancing pack. Currently, they don't have it, but they have the print product for that. It'll be better if they have it on the same product.

I have been using FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) for three years.

It is primarily for the enterprise environment segment. Even if one of the three links goes down, another link will appear to resolve the issue. FortiWeb primarily relies on its high availability features.

We had a quick response from support since we have partnered with them. 

Positive

The initial setup was easy because we had training. Also, the FortiGate team provides good support. It took around around five to six days to complete. It is only a plug-and-play environment.

The price is cheap compared to other products in the market. It costs 15-20% less than CheckPoint.

It is more than a basic firewall. It includes various features for enhanced security, such as protection against threats and vulnerabilities specific to web applications. Depending on their roles and responsibilities, some people who work on EDS may also interact with FortiWeb WAF.

FortiWeb offers a comprehensive product suite for SOC integration, including automation and SIEM capabilities. It also offers a complete integration package, including physical components that ensure a consistent experience for internal and external teams.

It includes an analyzer that provides comprehensive visibility. It is designed to optimize costs while sending detailed analytics and other relevant data.

I recommend the solution for security.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for web filtering purposes. We use it to allow or block any application.

The most valuable features of the solution are SD-WAN, filtration, web filter, application filter, and IPS. The solution's console is very user-friendly and very easy to manage. The solution has good stability and a user-friendly interface.

It would be good if the solution integrated with other solutions, like SAP.

I have been using FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) for nine to ten years.

FortiWeb Web Application Firewall is a very stable solution.

I rate the solution’s stability ten out of ten.

Every location with 200 to 300 people has installed the FortiWeb Web Application Firewall.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for scalability.

Our experience with the solution's technical support has been good. We promptly get support from the technical support team.

Positive

The solution’s initial setup is easy and can be done in a few hours.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a nine or ten out of ten.

I would recommend FortiWeb Web Application Firewall to other users because it is a good product.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for the office in Oracle.

Fortinet FortiWeb is priced well.

The product’s stability could be improved.

I have been using Fortinet FortiWeb for one year. We are using the latest version of the solution.

The product’s stability is normal. I rate it six out of ten.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup depends on technical knowledge.

The solution is cheaper compared with other solutions. It has a yearly license.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

In my company, we use FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) for security.

FortiWeb is a small tool that can be used by those of our customers who use Fortinet FortiGate as their firewall. I will use Barracuda Email Protection for any customer who uses a firewall from a solution provider other than Fortinet FortiGate.

The product lacks features offered by enterprise-level firewall tools. The solution needs to offer more enterprise features like other brands.

It would be great if FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) had something like a wizard to allow for more integrations with other popular firewall products like Fortinet, Palo Alto, and so on.

I have been using FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) for three years. I use the solution's latest version.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

There are 2,000 users of the solution in my company.

The solution's technical support was helpful and responsive. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have previously used SonicWall.

The initial setup was easy since it was possible to get remote support for the product.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

It is a cost-effective product. If you need an extra module in the product, there will be an extra cost in addition to the licensing fee.

There are five engineers needed for the maintenance of the solution.

If there is a requirement and one is already using a firewall from Fortinet, then it is easier to deploy FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF). Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The reporting available is pretty great.

We find the configuration capabilities to be very good. 

Technical support is helpful.

It's stable. 

It can scale well. 

I like the user interface. 

It's not the most popular option. Many clients prefer instead Citrix or Proxy Blue Coat. It might be a bit difficult to configure. 

The upgrade process could be a bit smoother. 

Sometimes the integration doesn't work on the first or second try.

The solution is a bit expensive. 

We first installed the solution eight or nine years ago. We've used it for almost a decade. 

The solution is pretty stable. I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of stability. Sometimes the upgrades don't go as smoothly as we would like. 

The solution is scalable. I'd rate it four out of five in terms of how easy it is to expand the product. 

I can't complain about the technical support. They are pretty good. I found them to be helpful. However, it may depend on the engineer you get on the line. 

Positive

The initial setup has a moderate level of difficulty.

We only need one person to deploy and maintain the product.

It takes about a week to have the entire solution set up.

We install the solution for our clients. 

It's always difficult to measure ROI when it comes to security. It's always just a smart investment for a company.

The product can be costly.

The licenses are paid annually. You do have several licensing choices. They don't have too much choice. However, their options are good. 

We are not an end user. We are resellers.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We are using Fortinet FortiWeb to deliver service to our customers.

The valuable feature of Fortinet FortiWeb vulnerability scanner.

I have been using Fortinet FortiWeb for approximately 14 years.

The Fortinet FortiWeb is very stable.

We did not have any problems with the scalability of Fortinet FortiWeb.

We have the development and network teams using the solution. It is approximately seven people in total.

I did not use the support from Fortinet FortiWeb.

The initial setup We Fortinet FortiWeb is straightforward. The full process of the deployment took approximately two weeks to 16 days.

Most of the deployment is done by our development team because they have some parameters that match the configuration. However, when we initially did the deployment we used a consultant company.

The license to use Fortinet FortiWeb is approximately $14,000.

I rate the price of Fortinet FortiWeb a four out of five.

The solution does not require a lot of maintenance.

I would recommend this solution to others. If someone wants to use the internet with an application website or any other internet application, content filtering is very useful to filter all the requests that are coming to the server so that no one can hack or harm the system.

I rate Fortinet FortiWeb a nine out of ten.

The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiWeb is the reports and the AI-based features.

Fortinet FortiWeb could improve data integration.

I have been using Fortinet FortiWeb for approximately six months.

Fortinet FortiWeb is a stable solution.

The Fortinet FortiWeb is scalable.

We have three administrators using the solution and more than 300 end users using it.

The support from Fortinet FortiWeb is good, but they could improve their response time.

Positive

We did not use another solution prior to Fortinet FortiWeb.

In the initial setup of Fortinet FortiWeb, we wanted to deploy it with WCCP mode, but we cannot do it because of the limitation with our Cisco ASA firewalls. It's difficult to integrate with FortiWeb. It is difficult to integrate Fortinet FortiWeb with other vendors other than Fortinet solutions. We cannot integrate it into our existing Cisco Firewall environment. We had to change the system to true transparent deployment mode.

The price of Fortinet FortiWeb is expensive in our Ethiopian currency.

I rate Fortinet FortiWeb a nine out of ten.