We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and ThreatLocker Protect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This is stable and scalable."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The stability is very good."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"EMS central reporting with fabric connectivity to FortiGate and FortiAnalyser is great and has seamless integration which makes managing 3000 devices a breeze."
"The solution offers great stability."
"It's easy to use, easy to deploy, and I have more visibility over my network that shows which users are connected to the firewalls, which users are connected to the network, and what they're accessing."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to deploy. Deployment, configuration, and troubleshooting are very easy."
"The setup for FortiClient is really straightforward."
"I find it very easy to configure and also very stable."
"You can scale the product."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's fast and safe."
"Every single feature has been invaluable."
"The interface is clean and well-organized, making it simple to navigate and find what we need."
"The sandbox functionality is fantastic."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"Application control, ring-fencing, and storage control are the most important features, followed closely by elevation."
"The biggest improvement has been knowing that something unauthorized isn't going to get installed on anyone’s machines."
"The most valuable feature is probably the ability to block programs from running. ThreatLocker has some built-in features that make it super easy. You can also contact their support within the program. If you're having issues, you can click on that button and connect with someone in five to 10 seconds."
"While it can be frustrating at times, we appreciate the low-level security provided by the application whitelist."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"Cloud services are very expensive for us."
"FortiClient is not great in Linux."
"Its stability can be improved. It is not as reliable as I would like it to be. There are times when things don't work quite right. Our biggest pain point is not related to Fortinet FortiClient and the whole scheme of things. It is related to one of the additional services called FortiGuard. They are the arm that does all of the updates to definitions, keeps all the signatures updated, and responds to new threats and whatnot. What we have found is that they react quickly, but sometimes their solutions aren't compatible with all of the components of the Fortinet security suite, specifically around FortiSandbox."
"We do not use the solution every day and there are times when the new users have trouble reconnecting. The technology itself works but our users getting adopted to it is a major problem. Having the user adapt to the desktop landing page that it begins on is throwing them off a bit."
"The product's performance and pricing could be better."
"It takes too long to install."
"Working with Distribution sometimes comes at a cost due to a lack of knowledge of the current status of your licensing and products."
"The connectivity could be improved."
"The snapshots used in the ThreatLocker University portal are outdated snippets and have not been updated in conjunction with the portal itself."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting needs to improve its user interface and overall workflow."
"From a reporting perspective, enhancing the ability to customize reports would be beneficial."
"ThreatLocker could offer more flexible training, like online or offline classes after hours. The fact that they even provide weekly training makes it seem silly to suggest, but some people can't do it during the day, so they want to train after work. They could also start a podcast about issues they see frequently and what requires attention. A podcast would be helpful to keep us all apprised about what's going on and/or offline training for those people who can't train during the week."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
"One area I see for improvement is in the visibility of support tickets within the ThreatLocker ticketing system."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 14th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews while ThreatLocker Protect is ranked 26th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 13 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while ThreatLocker Protect is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatLocker Protect writes "Integration is simple, deployment is straightforward, and extensive well-written documentation is available online". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Ivanti Connect Secure, whereas ThreatLocker Protect is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress and Deep Instinct Prevention Platform. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. ThreatLocker Protect report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
