We performed a comparison between A10 Networks Thunder SSLi and Fortinet FortiWeb based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, Fidelis Security, A10 Networks and others in SSL/TLS Decryption."With the Thunder SSLi, we're better protected. We can stop use of VPN and proxies. We are better protected against dirty traffic coming back to our schools. Having a secure decrypt zone with the equipment lowers the chances that our security infrastructure could possibly miss an attack."
"Its most valuable feature is its ability to do its job accurately, effectively, and very quickly. The amount of traffic that we have going through our system is astounding... The delay with the SSL decryption turned on is almost unnoticeable."
"We have several proxies in our environment, so we localized internet traffic between these proxies. Instead of getting a really huge proxy box, according to our size, we can use three boxes and share the traffic with A10's load-balancer feature."
"The most important feature of this solution is protection from attack."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiWeb is the reports and the AI-based features."
"FortiWeb offers machine learning in the latest product. This fixed many problems. There are no false negatives."
"The ease of configuration is valuable. We have Azure WAF, we have OCI WAF, and we also have Cloud Armor for GCP, but their configuration isn't very easy. It's pretty simple in FortiWeb, and we can enable or configure whatever we want."
"SSL Offloading simplifies the public certificate handling and brings additional protection features."
"The most valuable feature is that this product represents a whole solution, including a WAF, and even anti-defacements."
"The most valuable feature is the attack signature and machine learning."
"It's the extra security that is the most valuable feature. You have insight into your traffic. There are some great insights into what utilities hackers are trying to exploit. It blocks a lot of stuff from the internet."
"There is one thing I would like to see changed. In their features for setting things up, there is a templating system that would normally assist clients. However, we had a better time setting up the device either through the command line or through the interface and not using the templates that were pre-installed. So there is room for improvement to the templates for initial installation."
"It would be great if it supported SSL operations according to Active Directory users. For example, if we want to bypass one of the servers or a client's internet access for SSL interception, we have to do it according to the IP address. It would be better if we could do it according to the Active Directory username. A10 says they kind of support that but we haven't tested it."
"I would like them to have a better UI (better universal design)."
"Fortinet FortiWeb could improve in reference architecture for different deployment scenarios."
"FortiGate could be improved on the security end because we've had some incidents with the customer. Otherwise, there is no problem."
"The solution could have more customization."
"Fortinet FortiWeb needs to improve the way it's configured. Common services like publishing exchange should be done in one click only."
"If the price was lower, it would be a bit more attractive, as an option, to the customers."
"Fortinet WAF came out recently, and there is not much feedback about customer experience. For each project, customers ask about the scenarios and references of the customers who have implemented this solution, which we don't have. They need to simplify the customer experience and provide more information so that we can propose Fortinet Fortiweb as a WAF solution to customers and convince them. They need to improve their service and training. We need good training to implement and use it properly and know more about it. We still don't know much about Fortinet WAF. We didn't get any proper training sessions. Other vendors like Cisco, Palo Alto, Check Point, and Barracuda provide such sessions. Whenever we receive a request from a customer for this solution, we just give the price. We don't propose this solution because we don't know much about it. We propose whatever we are familiar with and what is supported."
"The solution is rather complicated. If you know what to do, it's not bad, but it's complicated for a first time user to configure the solution. What I'd like to improve are the custom signatures."
"The interface could have the interdependent elements arranged sequentially and wizards that go through most common deployment actions."
Earn 20 points
A10 Networks Thunder SSLi is ranked 3rd in SSL/TLS Decryption while Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews. A10 Networks Thunder SSLi is rated 9.0, while Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Thunder SSLi writes "The SSL decryption successfully decrypts at a rate that has minimal to no impact on our end users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". A10 Networks Thunder SSLi is most compared with Symantec SSL Visibility Appliance, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Fortinet FortiADC, whereas Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Imperva Web Application Firewall.
We monitor all SSL/TLS Decryption 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.
