Fortinet FortiWeb Reviews

We primarily view the VPN net and use the WAF as our web protection.

The interface is very straightforward and easy to use.

It's stable. 

The support is quite good.

We found the initial setup pretty simple. 

Sometimes, even if you follow the documentation, it doesn't work as expected. 

The solution can be a bit pricey.

I've used the solution for about one year, or maybe a bit more than that.

Sometimes it is not as stable as it could be. We've had some issues. Sometimes the loading will be disrupted for no apparent reason. It might be due to the WAF.

We have not tested the scalability of the product.

We have two people working on the solution right now. 

It's possible that we will scale the solution in the future. There is the potential that we will use it on another project.

We have contacted support for reliability issues, and they have been able to resolve everything within a matter of hours. They are very quick. 

Positive

We previously used F5. F5 needs a bit of a higher skill set. It takes some experience to operate.

The implementation took about two months. It's not so hard to set everything up. It's easier than, for example, F5, to set up.

In terms of maintenance, for WAF, I need about three people to handle various tasks. 

We hired a consultant to assist us during the setup. The consultant helped my people learn the process so we could become self-sufficient. 

We have not seen any ROI at this time. 

The solution is a little expensive. I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of affordability.

I cannot speak to the exact price we pay for the product.

We didn't really look into other options as my boss is pretty well versed in other options. However, we are always looking into comparisons. 

We are using the latest version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution offers good configurations and works well with other Fortinet products.

The solution is scalable. 

We found the implementation process to be simple. 

If you want to block domains, you can do so. You do have the power to control access.

The product needs to be more stable. 

We have issues between primary and secondary IP. Secondary IP addresses cannot be on the same subnet as any primary or secondary subnet. You need to follow up between the primary and secondary. If you don't, there will be a problem. When your public applications are not working properly, the single point of communication from the public domain is an issue. If I want to resolve the situation, a quick solution is I need to fail over the primary to the secondary, and it will just start working. However, that is not a permanent solution. I don't know what the problem is exactly, and how we can permanently address the issue. 

If the price was lower, it would be a bit more attractive, as an option, to the customers. 

You do need to ensure you do the configurations carefully. Otherwise, you may have issues. 

I've been using the solution for two years. 

We can scale the solution. We typically work with enterprises, so, larger-scale companies. In our customer's company, they have about 6,000 to 10,000 people on the solution. 

Technical support is very good. they are quite helpful and responsive. 

I also use F5. It's got better pricing and is quite stable as well. However, if you don't know how to configure it, it can be a disaster. 

The initial setup is easy. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

It can be deployed in about half an hour. It doesn't take long to have it up and running. 

I handle a lot of implementations and can handle the process. 

The pricing could be better. They charge a bit more. That's why F5 is everywhere right now. The customer can see that F5 is stable and everything is working well, and then they see the price, and it's very attractive to them. 

I'm just a customer and end-user. 

I'm a consultant. Our customers are working with Fortiweb in their companies.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Mostly we use FortiWeb for replacing reverse proxy from our systems and add some security features to it to protect the web portal we are providing to our customers.  We use it to rewrite URLs and redirect FQDNs, et cetera, et cetera. That's the normal part.

The main feature I like is the ability to redirect web traffic from a readable URL to a real URL. All the security features are good.

One main feature we are very happy about is file security and upload functionality. It will restrict the number of file types that can be uploaded to our portal and prevents any malware. It helps with security.

We had some trouble using some features. Maybe we understood it the wrong way when reading the manual. We had to implement some workarounds to help this problem.

The GUI could be better. It's limited. 

I've been using the solution for one year. 

There are no complaints on our side. The performance and stability are fine. We used to have a cluster of two appliances. Everything seems to be fine when we update the firmware. We haven't had any issues.

The scalability may be slightly limited. We use hardware appliances. We need to buy appliances which have enough performance. You need to think about the sizing before you buy it. Scalability is not really possible with hardware. 

We use it more and more. We are going to migrate all the connections which are directed to a proxy to the classification firewall.

Normally, technical support is very good. All the tickets I opened have been solved in an average time.

Positive

It was the very first time that we used a web application firewall. We never used anything before.

We had some difficulties at the beginning in terms of setting it up. It was a very new product for us. We never had web protection firewalls before. We had some support from our supplier, so we referred to the initial implementation to get it done with external support.

I'd rate the ease of implementation at a three out of five. 

From a technical perspective, the deployment does not take a long time. Our problem internally was the organization and the planning as well as the communication with the other teams. That's what took so long. We started maybe one and a half years ago with the implementation and productive status was reached at the end of 2021. That's a long time. That said, one would say the management is at fault, not the actual technical staff.

At a cluster, so single point of failure, all this stuff, it kind of took around 24 hours to get it up. The offline time was very difficult, however.

We have two good people on staff that can handle deployment and maintenance. We are looking for another employee in the market, however, it's been very difficult to find someone.

The implementation was done in-house with some help from our supplier.

We have not noted an ROI yet.

We actually expanded our subscription for the next three years. I don't remember the exact price. It should be somewhere about 36,000 Euros. That's the cost for three years. It's moderately priced. I'd rate the general cost at a three out of five. 

We thought about other options, however, since we had a very good experience with the FortiGate Firewall, I decided to buy FortiWeb. They operate well together. 

We are just customers and end-users.

Potential new users should compare different products from different vendors to make a decision on a web application firewall. It doesn't matter if it is FortiWeb, or F5, or something else, just take some time to compare. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is to protect web applications, web servers, and our customers' mobile applications. We are a Fortinet partner and integrator, installing both appliances and VMs. I'm a network security consultant. 

There are many valuable features in this solution including vulnerability scanning, IPS, and geolocalization. The product is user-friendly and simple.

The solution currently lacks a VM demo to enable testing prior to purchasing. It would make things easier for our clients to choose this product if they had that ability. We are based in Tunisia and the lack of multilingual technical support is problematic at times. 

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

We generally use the chat or phone for technical support with the occasional remote session with the technical team. The customer service is good but lacks a multilingual element that would benefit us. 

Positive

I previously used the Cisco IOS CLI for the web interface. It's more complicated than Fortinet. Fortinet offers simple, easy-to-use solutions. We are also a vendor for F5 which offers similar features and functionality to Fortinet but is more expensive. 

The initial setup is straightforward, it's a matter of choosing the architecture, the deployment mode, and configuring. Deployment time depends on the client's application. If it's a matter of one or two applications, deployment can take between two or three days. If there are many more applications that require protection, it can take over a month.

This solution works best for medium and enterprise-size companies. One of our clients is a bank, another is an educational institute with over 20,000 users. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

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 FortiWeb Web Application Firewall for security features while working in the financial area.

The product has good integration features.

The product's integration with Cisco needs improvement.

I have been using FortiWeb Web Application Firewall for 30 years.

The platform's stability is good, with good assessment and low-level design.

FortiWeb Web Application Firewall's scalability is good.

I have used Palo Alto and Check Point before.

The product is complicated to set up. The deployment time depends on the customer. Some customers have a deployment time of six to seven months, while others have a deployment time of two months. The process involves an assessment for a month, then a low-level design for another month.

FortiWeb has a good presence because of its price.

We are integrators with all the product certifications. We have a good team. We prefer assessment and low-level design before starting with the project.

I rate FortiWeb Web Application Firewall an eight out of ten.

We use FortiWeb Web Application Firewall to protect websites from injection attacks.

FortiWeb Web Application Firewall blocks attacks from application layers and provides protection.

FortiWeb Web Application Firewall's signature database updates could be improved.

I have been using FortiWeb Web Application Firewall for one year.

I rate FortiWeb Web Application Firewall an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate FortiWeb Web Application Firewall a nine out of ten for scalability. Around 10 to 12 users use the solution in our organization.

The solution’s customer support is not good.

Positive

The solution’s initial setup is easier than other products.

It takes one week to deploy FortiWeb Web Application Firewall. As part of the deployment process, we create a FortiGate interface, connect FortiWeb to our website server, create virtual web servers in FortiWeb, and write some access control rules for protection purposes.

FortiWeb Web Application Firewall's pricing is suited for small or medium organizations.

FortiWeb Web Application Firewall is deployed on-cloud in our organization.

I recommend FortiWeb Web Application Firewall to other users because it helps block many attacks that come from the web and application layers. Using the solution to protect organizations from attacks is an easy process.

Overall, I rate FortiWeb Web Application Firewall a nine out of ten.