We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features are support and security."
"The GUI is user-friendly and it's easy to understand how to manage it."
"I have recently been looking at the SSL certificate features and the learning mode of the appliance. This appliance learns from the pattern of SSL attacks."
"The GUI is user-friendly."
"This product is very user-friendly."
"It is easy to install and to maintain."
"It's stable and works efficiently against OWASP Top 10 attacks."
"It is a stable product."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see more improvements with respect to threat intelligence."
"Describing security rules should be improved. It's tricky to define new feature tools when you want to describe an attack pattern and want to block it."
"We would like the interface to be easier to use and more user-friendly. The interface needs to be enhanced."
"The integration with other products should be improved."
"FortiWeb needs to have support for the newest technology being used in web applications."
"In terms of performance, it needs to be more robust."
"The Layer 7 DDoS attacks need improvement, it could be better."
"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."
"Our licensing costs, yearly, are just under $15,000. Your initial cost of acquisition is obviously going to be more than $15,000..."
"The costs are standard. We pay around $1,600 yearly."
"All our Fortinet pricing is bundled together for different products, like FortiGate, FortiAnalyzer, and FortiWeb. FortiWeb, by itself, is probably around $2,500 to $3,500."
"FortiWeb is more expensive than some competing products."
"Due to the situation in Iran with the sanctions, the price of this solution is very expensive."
"It's an expensive solution, although there are no additional costs."
"It is fine now. We had to earlier negotiate the price."
"It is an expensive suite and it is an expensive solution, but it is a manageable one for an enterprise."
"Its subscription prices are cheaper, and it is not very expensive. From a price perspective, Fortinet is a very well-known security vendor. Subscriptions are very simple. They have a couple of licenses on an appliance, and that's it. The cost is not that big. One license is 40K, which they give with all the products. Another one includes the subscriptions for threat prevention, IPS, sandboxing, etc, which is more than enough."
Earn 20 points
SSL encrypted traffic is growing, rendering most security devices ineffective.
Gain visibility into encrypted traffic with SSL Insight and stop potential threats.
FortiWeb is a web application firewall (WAF) that protects hosted web applications from attacks that target known and unknown exploits. Using multi-layered and correlated detection methods, FortiWeb defends applications from known vulnerabilities and from zero-day threats.
A10 Networks Thunder SSLi is ranked 1st in SSL/TLS Decryption with 2 reviews while Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 23 reviews. A10 Networks Thunder SSLi is rated 8.6, while Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Thunder SSLi writes "Enables our content filter to do its job without any noticeable delay ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Reasonably priced and offers a good graphical user interface but need better integration capabilities". 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 Fortinet FortiADC, Fortinet FortiOS, F5 Advanced WAF, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway.
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.