FortiClient 5.2.1 - How disable ads, links, prompts to install other features, etc.?

[obrienw]

We moved to FC 5.2.1 for pre-logon SSL-VPN after the debacle of the 4.5.3 updater trying to automatically install an entire security suite on top of our existing one.  Someone eventually dug up a registry hack to stop that.  And now I find out that 5.2.1 is still prompting users to add on the additional security features after explicitly installing VPN Components only.

How do I turn that off???

At no point in time should a regular user in an enterprise environment ever be prompted or offered the option of changing the security software on their computer; that's strictly an administrative function.  What's so hard about this?  It's completely baffling to me why I have to put so much work into preventing FortiClient from pwning my computers.

[jvanderzee · Accepted solution]

I have tried to work with support to see if these ads can be removed without needing to register to a Fortigate.  No other VPN client I know has this ad annoyance.  I've given feedback to Fortinet on this topic and have not heard a response.  If you use the FortiClient 5.2.0 (Download from your support login), backup the config and restore with the <ads>0</ads> tag altered (From 1 to 0) it will remove the ads for you.  For Forticlient 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 this backup and restore of the config to remove the ads does not work anymore.  I'm guessing this is some sales ploy but I find it absurd for users needing only the VPN functionality from Fortinet.  This has already annoyed some of my clients and instead leads me to look at other NGFW vendors rather than purchase the products forced in your face with every VPN connection.

[Christopher_McMullan · Accepted solution]

I think you may have missed the mark, bartman10. I'll explain a little more of what lies behind my reasoning. Whether you believe me or still think the same way afterwards is up to you - I'll leave you the last word.

I contribute technical answers on the forums voluntarily to fill a need for more trained engineers to weigh in on what we've seen, what can be helpful in resolving issues, etc. I suggested pursuing a New Feature Request because I know from experience that it works - it's the most effective way right now to see the product changed.

<THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION>

************************************************************************************

I challenge you to find a company that gives the highest priority for product enhancements to forum posts. They may listen to forum posts, but sales still drive the biggest, quickest changes.

Submitting a New Feature Request allows you/Fortinet to do the following:

-bring attention to a needed/desired change

-vet the issue for all required technical points and dimension

-identify a purchase which hinges on Fortinet doing what other vendors and competitors are demonstrably doing better or at a lower cost

-give Fortinet an exact idea of how much money is at stake if the sale is lost

It can seem as if sales is a muddy way of determining what administrators really want, but no one will buy a company's product if it falls behind in needed security features, or if they can find a better deal elsewhere. Cost, performance, and security mean products sell. A publicly-traded UTM company must respond to changes that will make a profit/sales impact.

If you can make a business case for an ad-free VPN-only version of FortiClient that is unlicensed (you can already strip ads via the FortiClient Configurator by creating custom .msi and .mst installers), then it will likely be implemented.

Aside from purely financial imperatives, submitting an NFR does two other things: it (i) gives you ownership over the change; and (ii) allows proper and formal project management decisions to be made based on the request. All projects need a relative priority, which the sales and business case can help to set, and in case you need to be consulted for more feedback, or to refine the feature, you have a stake in making sure the feature is released *exactly* in the way you want.

************************************************************************************

</THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION>

If you have concerns over whether your SE is responding in a timely manner to your feedback, or you doubt if features are really being pursued, they should hear about it directly. The system should work - it shouldn't be left broken.

Receiving feedback through any channel is better than people silently harboring grievances and walking away. For my part, I hope my comments help direct you to the best resource who can champion your request.