The primary use case is to securely receive email from external sources, such as Microsoft Exchange on the cloud, and relay it to internal Exchange servers. Additionally, it involves sending emails from the Exchange server to external networks.

Fortinet FortiMail enhances the email security posture of organizations by securely transmitting emails between external and internal servers.

The most effective features in intercepting malicious emails include controls like DKIM and SPF. Fortinet utilizes specialized processing units, which network faster and sample more efficiently compared to others.

Additionally, the PSIRT database and threat intelligence database contribute to the effectiveness, and the number of false positives is lower than with other products.

There are multiple areas for improvement, such as user visibility, which is less compared to Cisco's secure appliances. Header inspection and containerization, like on-prem premises sandboxing, need enhancement. Improving spam ranking to match international standards is essential.

Moreover, Fortinet's position in the Gartner Magic Quadrant needs to improve, as Barracuda and other appliances are currently ahead.

I have been using Fortinet FortiMail for approximately three months.

Fortinet FortiMail is reliable and does not halt, provided that enough resources are available. The integration with Fortinet Analyzer and SIEM has been smooth, and everything is working fine.

The scalability of Fortinet FortiMail is satisfactory. Specifically, the product runs well in extreme environments, and I have not experienced any hardware failure issues.

Training support from Fortinet in our region could be more available, as partner training and support are crucial for effectively understanding and recommending solutions to customers.

Previously, I worked with Barracuda and Cisco's IronPort Email Appliance for email security.

Barracuda is less expensive compared to FortiMail. FortiMail is mid-range, and Cisco is priced higher.

There are multiple areas for improvement, like enhancing the product's user visibility and spam ranking. On-premises sandboxing should reduce false positives and strengthen its position compared to other products in the Gartner Magic Quadrant.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

It operates as an alternative mail server, particularly adept at receiving and rescanning messages before they reach the intended recipients.

FortiMail possesses notable strengths, and one key feature is its store-and-forward concept.

It could benefit from enhancing its functionality, especially in terms of advanced filtering. Introducing features such as AI-based and cloud-based filtering could significantly improve mail security. Fortinet should consider developing more robust protection mechanisms, particularly for cloud-based environments. Currently, users often refrain from placing Fortinet in front of Office 365 Exchange unless it's a cloud-based solution. Improving the upgrade process, making it more user-friendly, and simplifying the management of hardware components could enhance the overall user experience and appeal of Fortinet's email security solution.

I would rate its stability capabilities nine out of ten.

Regarding scalability, the challenge lies in the licensing model tied to the hardware appliance. The current setup necessitates choosing between a higher or lower capacity appliance, creating inefficiencies. For instance, if you opt for a smaller appliance designed for up to a hundred users and the client has fewer users, you end up paying for unused capacity. On the other hand, choosing a higher-level appliance for a larger user base may result in unnecessary excess capacity and costs. It would be advantageous if Fortinet could address this issue by offering more flexible licensing options. This way, clients could pay for the specific number of users they have without being constrained by preset appliance capacities. This adjustment would enhance the scalability and cost-effectiveness of Fortinet's email security solution.

Initially, when reaching out to Fortinet's tier-one support, we observed effective resolution of issues. However, at the entry-level, it seems that there's a repetition of updating tickets, and the problems persist. Having worked with Fortinet for an extended period, I've noticed a shift in the support dynamic. Either the personnel at the first level lack a complete understanding of the issues, or they are relatively junior, leading to extended resolution times for even minor concerns. Previously, their responsiveness was quick and efficient, with a maximum of 24 hours for a technical person to address an issue. However, recent changes in their approach may be contributing to the longer turnaround times. The process of logging a technical call and receiving a response has become somewhat extended, even for smaller issues. I would rate it six out of ten.

I often recommend exploring alternative products that diverge from the appliance-based approach. One notable option is Marshal from Paradigm, which was previously known as NetIQ. Marshal operates as software deployed on a server, handling inbound scanning, and forwarding emails based on established policies. This on-premises solution ensures that emails undergo scanning before reaching the main server, providing a robust layer of security. Other alternatives include GFI MailEssentials, Mimecast, and FortiGuard. Each of these products has its unique features and pricing structures. I've had positive experiences with Enhanced Security, our own rebranded solution. This cost-effective option is specifically tailored for SME segments, running seamlessly for the past four years. It is AI-based, cloud-based and has demonstrated its compatibility with various email platforms, including online exchange servers, on-premises servers, shared hosting, and Google Suite. Users have found it to be a reliable and efficient choice for email security.

The initial setup of Fortinet is not suitable for everyone; it requires a solid understanding of how email systems function, making it less accessible for entry-level or junior technicians. Proper comprehension of mail concepts is crucial for a successful deployment. Incorrect configurations may lead to misleading outcomes, potentially causing disruptions in both incoming and outgoing emails.

Upgrading the storage requires a more involved process, as it is not a simple plug-and-play scenario. Users must go through the entire setup again, which can be a cumbersome task.

The pricing is on the higher side.

While FortiMail provides a valuable option for those focused on transparent mail filtering or security solutions, it may not be the preferred choice for users accustomed to the features offered by platforms like Microsoft Exchange. In the SME segment, factors such as functionality, ease of use, and cost play a significant role. Many businesses in this category may find cloud-based solutions more appealing due to lower costs, simplified maintenance, and performance considerations. If an organization operates in the enterprise segment and has a substantial budget, considering Fortinet might be a viable option. However, for the SME segment, I would not recommend it due to the cost involved and the complexities associated with yearly renewals. Implementing Fortinet requires a level of technical expertise, particularly in understanding how mail servers function. Overall, I would rate seven out of ten.

They offer a range of features like firewalls, email, endpoint security, etc. Fortinet’s support services are good. We can provide a demo for customers to see email filtering during their POC.

The product's cybersecurity features could be better compared to Proofpoint.

I have been using Fortinet FortiMail as an integrator and reseller for four years.

The product is stable.

The product is scalable.

The product's technical support team is good.

Some customers find Fortinet easier to use, while others prefer Proofpoint. There are differences in catching malicious emails and handling false positives in both solutions. Based on customers' feedback, Proofpoint is often seen as more robust but comes with a higher cost.

The initial setup is easy. Anyone with an experience in email security solutions can install it. Deployment time depends on the environment; it may take as little as two days or up to two weeks. It requires one executive to implement and maintain it. The product needs tuning every one or two months for maintenance. The engineer has to check for email caches.

Fortinet FortiMail is inexpensive.

You have to consider the specific environment's requirements, including the cost and its impact on the business while looking for a vendor.

I rate Fortinet FortiMail a seven out of ten.

We use the solution to scan the email for phishing or spam. We filter those emails, send them to the server and then deliver them to the end users.

The solution has all the essential email scanning features, including bulk scanning, fraud detection, etc.

Sometimes, authentic emails get blocked by the solution's firewall. In this case, our network team has to keep tuning the device from time to time.

We have been using the solution for the last five years.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. We have 3000 solution users in our organization.

The solution's technical support is good.

The solution's initial setup process is easy. In case of any difficulties, we contact the vendor's support team. The process involves configuring the policies of the device as part of the information security.

The solution is reasonably priced compared to Cisco.

It is an old and excellent product. You can use it on your organization's core system. I rate it a seven out of ten.