We performed a comparison between Appgate SDP and Fortinet FortiManager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks, Cisco and others in ZTNA as a Service."The flexibility of the tool is valuable. It is very robust. It has a very robust configuration capability."
"The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort."
"It is a scalable solution...The support answers your questions very fast."
"The interface is really friendly. It's simple to understand."
"It is pretty stable."
"One of the most important features is stopping lateral movement across our network."
"Technical support is great. When we have sent urgent tickets and they do reply back within fifteen minutes."
"FortiManager's ability to scale is good."
"The central management feature is the most valuable to me."
"The most valuable features are the centralized management of the firewalls."
"The features are good."
"FortiManager enables us to set unified firewall policies from one centralized dashboard, reducing human error. If you do not have a central dashboard, there's a chance you might set a policy on one firewall and forget to do it for another."
"It makes management very easy."
"There is something called zero-touch provisioning, where you can add a new device without any configuration. You just add it to FortiManager and then forget about it."
"The user interface should be improved as it is not very easy to work with the updates."
"One limitation is that it's harder to provide access to multiple applications in the company with Appgate, but that's probably because of poor management."
"They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features to enhance remote micro connection."
"It would be better to connect to an application portal from any device. Documentation and support could be better."
"One thing that kind of sticks out to me is the ability to do a proper non-split tunnel. VPN tunnel-wise, it is not really a true unsplit tunnel, but I think that's just because of the way it's designed. A split VPN basically allows your system to talk to other systems without being forced down the tunnel. A VPN running in a non-split tunnel mode forces all the traffic down the tunnel to wherever you're VPNing to. It forces the traffic down so that the traffic is subject to the firewall and rules that you have in your corporate environment and such. It helps to prevent remote malicious folks that may be talking directly to that box from piggybacking into the corporate environment through it. They do it partially, but it would be nice to see more of an enterprise-level solution there."
"On the cloud, when you make some changes, it may be difficult."
"It would be better if it were easier to run a routing protocol. In the next release, I would like them to enhance some features in the GUI rather than CLI or OSP. For example, whenever a customer generates an ISP directly on the firewall, it's complicated to configure the routing protocol."
"In the next release, FortiManager should include more protection features."
"Having FortiManager work with all of the Fortinet products would be a good improvement."
"The interface could be improved. It is split up into different areas, which makes it more difficult to navigate and get the right section of the correct file. The solution is quite expensive, so it would not be suitable for small to medium sized organizations."
"The fabric for integrations or connections could be improved."
"FortiManager could improve by making it easier to port larger policy packages to the FortiGate firewalls. Sometimes, there's an issue when we install a big package of policies. If you have a couple thousand policies for FortiGate firewalls, it can take a few minutes to receive a response from the remote devices. It's only an issue when you're dealing with thousands of policies and installing them on a large number of devices."
"The areas that need improvement are implemenation and support. In terms of implementation, it mainly needs clear documentation."
"The scalability has room for improvement."
Appgate SDP is ranked 10th in ZTNA as a Service with 6 reviews while Fortinet FortiManager is ranked 3rd in Network Management Applications with 61 reviews. Appgate SDP is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiManager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Appgate SDP writes "Helps us manage traffic-related issues and streamlines access management for the network ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiManager writes "Easy to set up with good integration capabilities but we've had troubles when moving devices". Appgate SDP is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter and Netskope Private Access, whereas Fortinet FortiManager is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, Fortinet FortiOS, Cisco DNA Center, Zabbix and AlgoSec.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.
