We primarily use the solution for basic access, filtering, and more.
We have set up the IPsec VPN through that. It's a UTM device.
We primarily use the solution for basic access, filtering, and more.
We have set up the IPsec VPN through that. It's a UTM device.
It's easy to manage, actually. It's a UTM device rather than a normal firewall as compared to Cisco PIX, or Juniper.
The web filtering is a key feature of almost every firewall. However, this appliance is more secure, reliable, and stable. We haven't had any problems, so far.
For ten to 12 years it has been quite secure.
It's scalable.
Policy management is very easy, and configuration is very easy as well.
The support is also good.
Real-time threat monitoring is not there. The traffic hitting the firewall needs to be improved to have real-time monitoring. Traffic should be more visible and should be available on the dashboard. Even if something is blocked, we should be able to see the traffic. We need a security posture showing the organization's security posture to see the traffic hitting the firewall, the user or entity behavior, et cetera. If there's an abnormality, it should be reported. We need to be able to generate multiple reports and see everything in the logs. Logs are only available for a week; we should have them visible for up to three or six months or even a year.
It can be a bit expensive.
If you have an emergency and need support immediately, it can be hard to reach them as they don't have a direct number to call.
I've been working with the solution since 2007.
This is reliable, stable, and problem-free. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. I'd rate the product five out of five in terms of stability.
It is a scalable solution. It's easy to expand. That said, appliance to appliance, there is a limitation. However, I would rate it four out of five in terms of scaling capability.
Our organization has 400 to 500 people on the solution right now. There's another organization as well that has 300 people using it. Overall, 10,000 or more people are likely using it across 2,000 locations. Every location has one or two firewalls to make it redundant in a failover mode. If one fails or one stops working, the other will take over. That never happens, however, it ensures we're safe and covered.
Technical support is great. They are helpful and responsive.
We have to send emails to get assistance. The response time is good, however, if something is an emergency, then it is difficult to reach people. There is no number to call to get help right away.
Positive
I have previous experience with Palo Alto and Juniper. We also have used Cisco.
I didn't choose Fortinet. It was already being used when I came along. It was a standard practice to use Fortinet across locations worldwide.
The initial setup is not complex. It's very straightforward and quite simple.
It has an easy initial setup process. Three people we involved in the setup process.
We first set up the basic policy, and then we did an IPsec VPN, and then, based on the access requirement of each business vertical, we manage the setup. We define the access website URLs that will be restricted or allowed, including port blocking, et cetera.
The time it takes to set up varies. Sometimes it's a night or a few hours, sometimes it's up to ten days. A basic setup will not take one or two hours.
We handled the process of implementation in-house. We did not need outside assistance.
We have not done an ROI calculation to see if there is anything there to note.
We pay a yearly licensing fee, however, in India, you can get licensing for up to two years. It is a bit expensive. That said, I haven't done a comparative analysis with other options on the market.
I'd rate it a four out of five in terms of affordability.
We're Fortinet clients.
We are using the latest version of the solution.
We are using Fortinet 60D, 80E, and 100 also.
I'd rate this solution nine out of ten.
FortiOS is the operating system of the FortiGate firewall. So whether it's an actual device or virtual machine, FortiOS is the actual software running.
FortiOS is dedicated to the next-generation firewalls. You can't really use it for anything else.
Essentially, their IPS and DNS filtering databases are the most useful for us. The industrial protocol database, which is the main one that we use, is great. They do extensive research to make sure that all the CVEs that they include in the IPS database are up to date and they keep it up to date. And that they don't miss any threats.
Their classification inside of that database of the various threats is typically very, very good. It's, for that matter, one of the best we've seen.
The IPS, IDS database with the DNS and industrial database are the three core main features that are the best for us.
We don't really find a lot of issues on it.
If I really have to complain about something, and there's not much, is the free VPN solution is a bit limited. Then again, it is a free solution. That's essentially it. Nothing else on the FortiGate or on the Fortinet OS side is really an issue. That's one of the main reasons why we use them: everything works and works well.
For what we use, there isn't really any missing feature. In fact, we actually want to get rid of some of the features that they have due to the fact that, for the security model that we need to implement, having more features actually opens up potential risk. We actually would like to have a device that is more focused specifically on OT environments the operational technologies.
We would prefer a device that's stripped down, that doesn't have all the other fluff in the more enterprise system. We actually want a feature where we can remove features that are there that we don't use. That is actually a thing that we find. We use it now in an operational technology environment. We use normal IT equipment. However, it's not a normal IT network. It differs significantly from a normal corporate IT environment. In a normal corporate IT environment, you like the fluff, and the additional features, and you can click, click, click, and you're done.
However, all of those features you add to a device open up risk for us. And that is something we do differently in the OT environment in operational technology. We prefer to not have the fluff. We prefer to have only what is needed for the device to do what it needs to do.
For example, imagine an additional feature for some sort of additional VPN technology has been added. However, it's not really needed for the OT environment, and it's not configured on the device, yet there's some sort of security threat in there. Now, all of a sudden, somebody can hack your system, and he's in there, and he's switching the lights on and off the entire city. And you don't know about it due to the fact that the additional fluff that we added to the system, we weren't aware of that issue was on there.
You can enable and disable certain modules in it. However, with disabling, nobody can really tell us if that module is disabled. Is it really disabled? Is it actually unloaded? Is it uninstalling Word from your laptop, or is it just not running Word?
I've been using the solution since 2009, give or take. That's almost 13 years.
We don't have any instability issues.
The solution can scale reasonably well, within the means, of course, of the device itself. You buy the device based on the current network requirements. We typically build in a bit of extra expandability into there to ensure that the device can cope with the additional load on it.
It greatly depends on the unit itself and what the limitations are. However, typically, expanding past that limit it's not complicated. Still, you'll have to procure a new unit. It's very crucial for us at the beginning phase to make sure that we know exactly what the customer's networking requirements are in terms of bandwidth, IPS, IDS, and throughput.
If a VPN needs to come in, we’ll need to consider what is done with the requirements of the VPN. And then, based on that, we'll specify the unit with additional capacity. However, if you go outside of the unit's capacity, you'll have to get a new or bigger unit.
It's actually an OT environment, not an IT environment. The actual user base is relatively small as not many people are allowed to use the operational side of things.
It's not like a normal enterprise network where you have thousands of people connected to it. It's very small. And when I say very small, it's typically ten or maybe 20 users.
If you log a support call, they have support engineers that jump on that support call very quickly to try and sort out your issue. There are absolutely no complaints that we have on their support side.
Positive
If you are a novice person that has never worked with any firewall and don't really understand the concepts, you may find it challenging to set up. However, there are help files, online tutorials, and videos that guide you on any of the topics you have in it.
It really helps you a lot to get to it in order to do the configuration. So it varies. It depends on how you install it. It may be fairly easy for your average user at home or for an average enterprise guy. However, for a process environment, it may be a bit more challenging since there are different approaches that we follow in order to install it. That said, Fortinet itself is not very difficult to use and its knowledge base and help are very extensive.
We only need one person to deploy the solution.
How long deployment takes depends on the customer requirements and what they require for their network that we need to implement. For the actual deployment of the FortiOS and the initial testing, you're looking anything from a day to about four days' worth of work.
That said, your pre-prep, in other words, all your pre-definition of your firewall rules and what security model you need to run and what security level in your Purdue model that you need to implement, can take a good couple of months to do since it's purely based on how you apply the IEC 62442.
It also greatly depends on what the customer needs are. The pre-prep work is actually the most important. The actual configuration is quick. However, the pre-prep work takes quite a while.
It's probably one of the best devices you have for ROI, especially regarding the current security landscape that we are in with the current kinds of security threats and stuff flying around. FortiGate is one of the best solutions regarding your return on investment.
If you look at the way that you'll typically have to try and clean systems, let's say, if you were infected with very bad ransomware, the amount of cost and effort and money that you'll have to spend in order to clean all your systems and get all your IT equipment and everything running in top form condition.
If you don't have a FortiGate unit protecting you, and you compare that to installing a proper FortiGate unit with all the correct modules and stuff like that, your ROI on it is much better than trying to clean everything after an attack. It's definitely well worth your investment.
There are different types of licensing. It depends on what kind of licensing you decide to take, if it's on an annual basis or if it's a three-year basis. It also depends on what modules you have selected in your firewall.
If you have the next business day on-site warranty, and if you have the actual hardware replacement, the normal RMA on devices like Cisco and those devices where the device fails, the company comes out and swaps the device out for you free of charge, that comes at a price.
It greatly depends on what options you take with their warranties and guarantees and stuff. It's very difficult to say what the licensing is until you break down which module you will take.
You need to buy the modules or the add-ons based on your needs. Licensing then will be directly connected to that. It’s like purchasing Windows. You can just buy Windows. However, you won't get Office working necessarily. It's the same with the FortiOS licensing. You buy the OS; then you buy everything you want to run on it.
You can just buy the operating system, the FortiOS. However, it won't give you IPS or any other advanced firewall rules. That will be an additional cost on your licensing.
They are slightly on the pricey side. They are affordable. However, they are not cheap. I’d rate them a two out of five in terms of affordability.
All of the infrastructure is hosted locally on-prem. We can't host it in the cloud due to security reasons.
We’re resellers more than partners. We provide the solution to customers. It's an industrial process environment.
Whether we use the latest deployment or not depends on the customer. However, we prefer to not install the latest version. We typically install two or three versions backward. The reason is, that your latest versions typically have a lot of bugs that are not necessarily known yet. Since this is a process plant, which is not directly connected to the internet, effectively, you go through a Purdue model, which connects to layer three or layer four before they get to the corporate network.
That then will break them out to the internet. The risk model for that is okay to have them not on the latest version. Also, since it is a process environment, literally, it's a process plant; it's an industrial process plant. The performance and uptime is king, not so much anything else. In a normal corporate environment, uptime and security is king. However, in a process environment, you need to keep the plant running 24/7 in order to pay the bills. The way that you look at how you install the product is quite a bit different than normal enterprise IT.
I’d rate the solution ten out of ten.
It is the best solution for users if they start out in a secure environment. They just need to make sure that they partner up with the correct partner that can guide them through the processes of obtaining the correct device and obtaining the correct training for themselves in order to use the device. That said, it's a highly recommended device to use from a perspective of security, usability, and installability.
We use the solution for automated solutions.
Fortinet FortiOS's valuable features include intuitive policy creation and deployment, precise parameter settings to determine thresholds, and security profiles such as web filtering and remote application filtering, among others. These features greatly enhance the platform. It includes every available application in terms of features. For example, in RDP, we must control the application. It’s already there whenever we want to apply their role or policy to that application.
Fortinet FortiOS's integration could be improved. It has extensive integration features, such as collectors for other services and third-party intelligence feeds.
I have been using Fortinet FortiOS for six months. We are using the latest version of the solution.
The product is stable.
The solution is scalable. We have around 300 users using this solution.
We initiated support from our servers because the other part of the company was not working. They helped us adjust the tuning, and it is working now.
The initial setup is not complex. It will take around two or three days to deploy. Product cleaning, readjustment, and screening are continuous tasks, as the nature of the work requires tuning and adjustments. To connect the PC to the console, we assign the networking settings, including data capabilities, and then reconfigure them on the web interface (UI). Some settings are also presented in a web-based format in the CLI because they are easier to navigate.
The reserve utilization is very low. Based on my learning, my expectation is for every product to have a good intelligence system and frequently updated threat intelligence. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
We are using the solution as a firewall. It provides portal access.
Feature-wise, the solution is strong. It has SD-WAN, site-to-site VPN, load balancing, and application-based load balancing.
It's very user-friendly.
Compared to other OEMs, due to the SD-WAN and the IPsec VPN, there is no need for the licensing for SD-WAN and the IPsec site-to-site on the remote access VPN.
Chipset wise they're using an ACS chipset dedicated to FortiOS.
The interface and dashboard are good.
We've been happy with the pricing.
The initial setup is easy.
There aren't any features missing at this time.
For monitoring purposes, we don't have any option to monitor the ISP link. If the ISP link goes down, then there is no monitoring tool or in-built monitoring tool. We can use a third-party application, like Zoho or PRTG. However, we would like something in-built.
They need to improve the solution at the application level.
I've been using the solution for five years.
Sometimes it is unstable. However, they'll easily fix the issue. We get upgrades and updates. If there is even any vulnerability or malware, we'll get it fixed immediately. They give good responses to the customers.
While there are bugs, sometimes the development team is on top of it and fixes everything fast. They'll send a patch in the next update.
We work with more than 100 customers.
Technical support is helpful and responsive.
Positive
I worked on FortiGate and Palo Alto.
The solution is very simple, very straightforward. It's not complex a all.
How long it takes to deploy depends on the client's requirements.
For a mid-level customer, we can deploy within an hour. We can complete everything and have it up and running, and the users get internet access. If they need more rules, they need more things, then it could take time, depending on the configuration.
The cost of the solution has been fine.
You do have to pay for a license. I'm not sure of the exact cost. I'm more of a technical person.
We're a customer and end-user.
We have the solution deployed on the cloud and on-premises.
I've deployed the 600F model a couple of times.
New users need to do some homework, and then we proceed with the configuration. Security-wise, they need to make the customized port.
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
Our company is a partner with Fortinet and uses the VDOM to deploy and service virtual firewalls for our customers.
The solution provides good firewall and antivirus protection via IPX and its security profile.
The solution needs improvement with DDoS protection.
I have been using the solution for nine years.
The solution is stable and I rate it an eight out of ten.
The solution is scalable and I rate it an eight out of ten.
The technical support is excellent.
Positive
The initial setup was not very easy but the solution does integrate without much complexity.
Our internal team of two engineers deploys the solution in about three days.
The licensing costs are paid by our customers on a monthly basis and include maintenance and technical support provided by three of our engineers.
The solution is quite affordable and I rate the cost a four out of ten.
The solution is a leader in security according to the Gartner Report and I recommend its use.
I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
We primarily use the solution as a firewall operating system.
The built-in SD-WAN is the most valuable aspect of the product.
It is simple to set up.
The solution has been stable so far.
It's easy to scale.
The pricing is excellent.
SD-WAN configuration could be easier.
The support could be better.
We'd like to see bandwidth optimization and traffic prioritization capabilities. These are the two things that I'm looking for, especially in SD-WAN.
I've been using the solution for three years.
It's stable as a product. However, SD-WAN has some issues. The route policies and how you prioritize traffic are the areas of concern for us.
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten in terms of how stable it is.
The scalability is great.
We have 1,500 users using the solution.
We are not very pleased with the support. It could be better.
Neutral
We are using Fortinet, however, we are exploring Palo Alto.
While the initial setup is not an issue, the SD-WAN configuration is a little complex.
There are three people here who are maintaining the firewalls.
The solution is the cheapest on the market. I'd rate it five out of five in terms of affordability.
I've compared this solution to other vendors. Palo Alto is number one in the world. Then I would go with Check Point. Then my third preference would be Fortinet.
We are end-users.
I'd rate the solution five out of ten.
We use the solution as a perimeter firewall.
It's simple to use in terms of inbound and outbound traffic management, traffic shaping, and connectivities, as well as the VPN. Everything is built into it, so it gives us quite a good well-rounded solution.
With assistance, the initial setup is easy.
The solution is stable and reliable.
I would like to see more statistics in the monitoring part. There is monitoring, there are DSCPs, and everything; however, I would like to have more active monitoring of the traffic.
Sometimes we would like to monitor some threats. For example, where are some bots, and how do we detect these kinds of things. That would be good for us.
I've been using the solution for more than five years.
We've been happy with the stability. It's been good so far. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash.
We are not scaling it right now. We bought it sometime back and we didn't need to scale it. We bought a higher end for our use case, which is still sufficient for another few years.
We have 200 or so users of different levels and positions on it.
We do not have plans to increase usage.
This firewall is quite a capable firewall - even up to 1000 users. Due to that, we didn't find any requirement to expand it or replace it somehow. It has helped us build our software-defined WAN, LAN, et cetera. It is sufficient for us. It gives us Gbps throughput, which is good enough. The firewall itself is 32Gbps capable, which is more than what we need.
We have used support sometimes. That said, mostly we use it via the third party directly. They are helping us with support of any type that we need.
There was something else that was used. However, I don't remember what was that previously.
The initial setup was easy for us as we had assistance.
For the deployment, one person was involved from the outside, and two people we assisting from our side. In total, three people were involved.
The deployment itself took a few days as we were rebuilding policies as well.
The initial setup was done by the contractor. For that reason, we had no problem implementing this.
The ROI we have witnessed is good. I would rate it five out of five.
We started with a three-year license and have since renewed it.
For three years, we paid about 2,800 KD, which is about $9,000.
The product is pretty affordable overall.
We are just customers of the solution.
We're not using the most recent version. We updated it a few years ago and we are still using that version.
I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. We are really happy with it in general.
Potential users should plan what they want to do with it before buying something this big and this good. They should know what they want to do first and then act accordingly.
The most important feature of Fortinet FortiOS is the IPS.
Fortinet FortiOS need to manage its memory and CPU utilization better. It peaks at times, which sometimes can be challenging.
In a feature release, if Fortinet FortiOS could have better cloud functionality would be a benefit.
I have been using Fortinet FortiOS for approximately seven years.
The stability of Fortinet FortiOS is good.
Fortinet FortiOS is scalable.
I rate the support from Fortinet FortiOS a five out of five.
Positive
The initial setup of Fortinet FortiOS is simple.
We evaluated Checkpoint and Cisco before choosing Fortinet FortiOS.
The manageability suit is better in Fortinet in terms of device manageability and OS upgrades. It has the capability of terminating a leased line, RF, and a USB dongle. When we evaluated Fortinet FortiOS, back in 2015, Cisco and Checkpoint did not have a 4G termination feature. Today if my MPLS goes down, the lease line goes down, I can connect a 4G dongle. In Cisco, you need to have a SIM embedded in a device and you need to open the device, put it on, and then you need to connect it and extend the cable. It is very complex. In Fortinet it is easy.
I rate Fortinet FortiOS a nine out of ten.