We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiToken and WSO2 Identity Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, Fortinet and others in Authentication Systems."FortiToken is available in a soft or hard token factor, so there's some flexibility in that. Beyond that, I would say it is a stable solution that has worked for us."
"I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. The solution is a smart product that anyone can easily access and manage. The solution is a good product for multi-factor authentication and to secure remote authentication in the corporate environment."
"The solution is simple and similar to Google Authenticator. It follows time-based authentication. We use it for hardware and software in one environment. The tool offers simple and fast authentication for SSL."
"I believe FortiToken is the simplest to implement."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The token-based authentication is good and modern aspect."
"We like the mobile FortiToken."
"Fortinet FortiToken is used for double factor authentication."
"The product provides easy integration between API manager and IT server components."
"The single sign-on procedure itself, as well as the ability to connect to external user sources such as Microsoft Active Directory and LDAP servers, are the solution's most valuable features."
"It's very easy to implement everything."
"I would rate the solution's stability eight or nine out of ten."
"Some of the valuable features of the solution are the easy integration with processes, such as Single Sign-On. Overall WSO2 is straightforward and does not need customization."
"The keystore feature has been most valuable for us."
"Comprehensive ecosystem."
"Its reporting should be better. The reporting feature is missing. I don't have any reporting of who has done what, what has failed, and what didn't work."
"I would like to see if FortiToken can integrate with Office 365 mail to support the same two-factor authentication experience that I have with ESET. With ESET, when a user logs in, they are easily directed to the ESET authentication page, where they are prompted to enter their OTP after supplying their username and password. I understand from support that FortiToken cannot do this with email integration. That's why I opted for ESET."
"I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. The migration issue definitely brings it down a bit."
"The solution works well. We have nothing to complain about."
"Support is a pain point in Bangladesh because there aren't many experienced Fortinet engineers in this country. It's easier to find one certified in Cisco, Palo Alto, or Juniper."
"The solution comes with two firewalls as a bundle. In that bundle, most of the individual users can be assigned to mobile users. However, in cases of technical difficulties, users may accidentally remove the mobile application. In normal scenarios, we get back to the activation key and assign it again."
"It needs a lot of coupling with their other Fortinet products. To implement FortiToken, I most probably need to couple it with FortiAuthenticator for full implementation. An RSA token can be used with many devices, whereas Fortinet FortiToken is always linked to only one FortiGate device. If I want to reuse the token across five or six FortiGates, I would have to get the FortiAuthenticator product. I can't use one token to connect to different FortiGates, and I need to get another product to enable this functionality. They should also improve the support for their mobile client. There should be a more detailed roadmap for the operating systems being supported. Some of our users were using an old iOS iPhone, and they were forced to get a newer phone because FortiToken didn't support that version of iOS. Similarly, there may be a version of Android that is not supported, so the users need to change the phone. This was one of the reasons why our deployment took longer."
"We can only use the tool with the FortiToken Mobile app."
"This solution does not have BPM workflows already integrated, we had to integrate the BPM module externally. They do not provide full-featured auditing and certification modules out of the box."
"The solution could improve its development from a user perspective."
"The high availability architecture has to be improved."
"Sometimes working with the code is difficult because I search for documentation about the code and how to work with the code, which is where I believe they should improve, by providing some documentation on how to work with the code."
"This solution requires extensive knowledge to be used effectively as certain areas of its use are not user friendly."
"There needs to be a good support model and easy-to-understand documentation."
"I found the initial setup to be very complex."
Fortinet FortiToken is ranked 4th in Authentication Systems with 20 reviews while WSO2 Identity Server is ranked 6th in Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) with 7 reviews. Fortinet FortiToken is rated 8.2, while WSO2 Identity Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiToken writes "A stable and scalable solution that provides an affordable and perpetual license". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WSO2 Identity Server writes "Provides valuable API management features, but its technical documentation needs improvement". Fortinet FortiToken is most compared with Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Microsoft Entra ID, Cisco Duo, Yubico YubiKey and RSA SecurID, whereas WSO2 Identity Server is most compared with Auth0, Amazon Cognito, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, SAP Identity Management and SailPoint IdentityIQ.
We monitor all Authentication Systems 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.
