I mentioned that the firewalls, such as the one from Fortinet, help protect my infrastructure from outside attacks. They perform a lot of network scanning and do not allow any unauthorized person to access my details and data. That's their application. A similar action is performed by the web application firewall, where web applications are restricted to certain users. This means that not anyone with malicious intent can access my web application content.

The good thing about Fortinet is that their enablement is very good in terms of training me and enabling resources on their technology.

Secondly, if I look at their pricing, Fortinet's pricing is way more competitive than Cisco or Palo Alto. They have almost 45% share in the firewall market, as per IDC. Fortinet is a large-sized company where their channel program is very robust and very flexible. They also understand the different personas of the channel stakeholders. In that way, they are rapidly growing in the channel ecosystem space and have started getting a lot of business. They are replacing many big traditional players in that space.

There are some issues pertaining to the migration. If some of my customers want to migrate from F5 to Fortinet Firewall, or the Fortinet WAF solution, there are some migration issues since I cannot migrate all the elements quickly using Fortinet Firewall. There is some integration work required to do that.

I have been working with Fortinet for almost one year and eight or nine months.

Their support is truly exceptional when I compare it with similar large-sized companies. In that category, they are top-notch at this point in time.

I was with SquadCast earlier.

F5 is a leader. They have some technical supremacy. F5 is more in demand, however, other players like Radware are also available in the market.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten at least.

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.

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.

We use FortiWeb to connect external APIs to our on-prem data center solutions.

We use FortiWeb for extended protection profiles to mitigate SQL injection and other web application threats. It is effective against web application threats and helps with our API protection and load balancing.

Additionally, it is cost-effective compared to other solutions.

They could integrate some kind of machine learning and AI facilities to automate workflows. We need to update regular patches frequently, and it requires regular installation and testing of these patches.

We have been working with FortiWeb for almost five years.

It is stable for us, showing good performance in handling web security.

I would rate its scalability at six because we have to increase our CPU and memory capacities, as it is confined to CPU and memories.

I would rate the customer service and technical support between eight and nine out of ten.

The setup is easy to manage.

It helps us save costs, about 20% to 30%.

In comparison to other solutions, the price is reasonable.

FortiWeb is suitable for medium-scale companies. I recommend using this solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

FortiWeb is used for web application protection. It protects a web application against attacks targeting their web applications, such as cross-site scripting, SQL injection, and other common application-specific attacks.

FortiWeb allows the organization to operate efficiently without any downtime or serious security breach.

FortiWeb has a very extensive library of known attack signatures, which makes the product fit for any environment, regardless if the customer uses Windows-specific or non-Windows-specific applications. It also has a very low rate of false positives and incorporates other FortiGuard capabilities, such as detection of botnet traffic.

For users not familiar with Fortinet, it could be beneficial to provide more user-friendly analytics and reporting. The product could offer better capabilities and analytics to pinpoint threat landscapes more efficiently.

I have been working with FortiWeb for approximately four years, maybe more.

FortiWeb has proven to be very stable and does not introduce latency in the network.

The product can scale according to the organization's traffic and architecture. It is available as a virtual appliance and a hardware appliance.

Fortinet provides very good support, which I would rate as eight out of ten.

At the moment, we are only working with Fortinet and not with other web application firewalls.

Someone without prior experience with the product might find it challenging to deploy. However, Fortinet provides good online training to assist administrators.

The total cost of ownership should be calculated based on the actual protection it offers to the application. Deploying FortiWeb can save 20% to 30% of resources within the organization.

FortiWeb uses a subscription-based license, but there is also an option for a perpetual license. It's not the cheapest solution. That said, it is worth the investment.

I have experience with other web application products.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

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.

I use FortiWeb to protect all the domains in my organization. It safeguards my entire web segment. All the connections to my environment that do not come over VPN are protected by it, which is crucial as I work in the financial sector with a strong focus on security. FortiWeb stands in front of my environment, where either a firewall or WAF is used to inspect all inbound traffic.

It helps protect my organization by providing robust security measures for our web segment. By onboarding all my APIs and web applications onto FortiWeb, it ensures that traffic not coming through the firewall adheres to stringent security protocols. The SaaS model of FortiWeb also helps in managing latency effectively despite our users being in Nigeria while the infrastructure is based in Europe.

The features that I value most in FortiWeb include its inspection of traffic for Intrusion Prevention, Anti-Malware, and whitelisting capabilities. It allows specific IP whitelisting or even regional whitelisting, ensuring only whitelisted traffic from certain geographical regions can access the environment. These security features provide a comprehensive defense against malicious activities.

One area that needs improvement is the handling of SaaS downtime. When there is downtime at their data center, it becomes a transit point issue for us, causing downtime in our environment as well. Although measures like built-in redundancy and manual switching between data centers exist, there is room for improvement in making these transitions automatic without impacting the customer. Automating the migration without manual intervention would significantly enhance user experience during downtime. Additionally, being able to read non-flagged traffic for operational purposes could also be an area to improve.

I have been using FortiWeb for about three years now.

The performance of FortiWeb is impressive because I use it as a SaaS-based solution, meaning it is not hosted inside my environment. Despite initial concerns about latency due to traffic redirection, it has performed well even with our users situated in Nigeria accessing infrastructure deployed in Europe.

Their support is generally good, around a seven out of ten. They have a structured support system where you need to log into a platform to raise a case. For urgent issues, you need to raise a case and follow up with a phone call to escalate it to a higher priority. However, one downside is that getting immediate attention during emergencies can take up to thirty minutes or more.

Setting up the account is quick and can be done in thirty minutes to an hour if you know what you're doing. Onboarding applications are straightforward and can be completed in about ten minutes or less. Overall, the deployment can be completed in a matter of hours.

FortiWeb is cheaper by over ten percent compared to other solutions like Barracuda and F5.

I evaluated F5, Barracuda, and Cloudflare. FortiWeb stood out in terms of ease of use, management, and cost.

I would recommend using Fortinet above any other tool. It is secure, cost-effective, and easy to use. The deployment and operational aspects are user-friendly.

Our company provides data center and cloud services as infrastructure providers. When customers need infrastructure like VMs or server allocation, we provide them with the vendor and offer services to operate, manage, implement, and integrate these security components.

The most valuable feature is the tool's integration with load-balancing applications, similar to FortiADC. Its importance depends on customer requirements, such as whether they prioritize application load balancing or layer seven protection.

Regarding areas for improvement, the documentation needs work. We had issues with a customer because the documentation didn't clearly show which devices can connect with FortiWeb WAF, leading to misconfiguration and difficult meetings. We also need deeper technical support - finding who's responsible for technical aspects is challenging. Hungary has a good Fortinet office with strong sales and pre-sales employees.

I have been using the product for four to five years.

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten.

It's not good with normal perpetual licensing, but we can solve the problem using flex licensing. That's why I'd rate it nine out of ten. We're satisfied with it. Many of our customers, including small, medium, and enterprise businesses, use FortiWeb WAF.

I rate the tool's deployment ease as seven out of ten. We have spent about 600 working hours to implement it.

The product provides very good prices to customers. The price is set well and offers great value for money.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. I advise others looking to use FortiWeb WAF to create deeper policy rules.

I use the solution in my company to make web applications more secure because we have a special portal or web interface that we have to make secure for cybersecurity and different accesses. We found that FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) works fine for such use cases.

The tool's most valuable feature is the web access it offers. We control every access, like who goes in and what they do.

The tool's price and performance are areas of concern where improvements are required.

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

It is a 100 percent stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

My company has three customers using the tool. One of the customers has 1,00,000 users.

My company manages the technical support with around four people, so it is not a complex process for us to handle. In general, the tool's support team is friendly.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

The solution's deployment needs a bit of time because we have to discuss it with the deployment team, which consists of software. The project keeps growing and changing daily, so if the people involved in the deployment make new software, we have to change something. It is an easy process and can be managed in around two weeks by one person.

The tool is really expensive. In our company, we could do a lot more, but the price is always a point covering areas like why we need one, whether it is important to discuss, why it is so expensive and so on.

Speaking about the licensing model, people need to opt for a subscription-based model. My company likes to have a subscription for at least three or five years because, otherwise, you have to renew the license. Managing the licensing part for one person can also be very complex.

The solution helps protect our company's web applications against common threats up to 99 percent. We feel very safe with the tool.

Speaking about how the tool has effectively mitigated web security threats for an application, I would say that it is an application behind the web portal, so there are about a hundred or thousand people who can access a website. If it is a sensitive application, and we have to watch every access to it to make it really safe, that is the reason why we need WAF on the application.

My company doesn't use AI with the tool.

I recommend the product to others. I would say that others need to have it if they have a shopping website or something similar. I know it is hard to sell because we find it quite hard whenever my company tries to do so.

The solution offers 100 percent integration with other Fortinet security products.

The ease of policy configuration in the tool is okay.

I rate the tool a nine to ten out of ten.