We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The usage in general is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Quota."
"The most valuable features are the enterprise modeling and the simple interface."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"Their reliability and their policy of pre-shipping replacements when a unit has failed."
"Fortinet FortiGate's reliability is valuable."
"Fortinet FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter."
"The product is easy to use."
"Cisco IOS Security is very robust and works very well."
"Cisco has always been a premium product. There's a lot of other entry-level solutions. This is more robust."
"Cisco products are very secure and integrate easily with other devices."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"What I have used the most and received the most benefit from is the IPsec technology."
"The security is very good."
"The most valuable feature is endpoint protection."
"The solution allows us to set parameters on where our users can go. We can block certain sites or ads if we want to."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the robust firewall, which we can also use as a UTM device."
"It's quite nice. It's very user-friendly, powerful, and there are barely any bugs."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls provide a unified platform that natively integrates all security capabilities."
"The packet level inspection is the most valuable feature. The traffic restriction features allow us to restrict the sub-features of any platform."
"Compared to other firewalls from Check Point, Fortinet, and Cisco, for example, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls use the most advanced techniques. They have sandbox integration and others in the orchestrator. Palo Alto's security features are at a higher level than those of the competitors at the moment."
"The most valuable feature is advanced URL filtering. Its prevention capabilities and DNS security are also valuable. It pinpoints any suspicious activities and also prevents the users from doing certain things."
"The centralization capability is the most valuable feature of this solution as it enables us to monitor our systems efficiently."
"I would like to see a more intuitive dashboard."
"I would suggest that Fortinet add sandboxing to their solution."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having more capabilities for troubleshooting VPN connections. For example, I do get some feedback about the current status, but I could use some history and logging of important events. The information is logged in our Syslog server, but I could use that information from the device. If they could provide a GUI to have some more insight on what's going with my VPN would be useful."
"At first glance, the interface for the device is very confusing."
"It claims it does DLP, but the degree and level of controls are very basic."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"There is a lot of improvement needed with SSL-VPN."
"I wish it would be more like the next generation firewall technology. There should be more selection between the application and filtering."
"It would be ideal if the solution had more capacity."
"Cisco very slowly introduces and implements the products, unlike other brands."
"I would love it if it has a link-by-link feature, integration with Unified Threat Management (UTM), and load balancers. They haven't got any link-by-link feature right now, which can be a very attractive option. This link-by-link feature can also be made available for Cisco's UTM firewalls. The link-by-link feature is available in some of the other firewalls. Currently, integration with UTM is missing. Cisco IOS Security also doesn't have the load balancers and a few things that need to be done to get a good UTM firewall. Normally, other firewalls have UTM. As a next-generation firewall, it's good, but as a UTM, it has to do some work."
"The initial setup is complicated."
"Most of their features are meant for Cisco. You cannot integrate them with any other vendor."
"The graphical user interface or the GUI could be better. Beginners can use some devices with the GUI, but some security devices are configured using CLI. It would also be better if it had its own Intrusion Protection Service and Intrusion Detection Service on the server."
"I would like upgrading iOS to be a bit easier."
"The support could be improved."
"People sometimes find it more expensive as compared to other solutions. There are also fewer training opportunities for Palo Alto than Cisco and other vendors."
"I am in GCC in the Middle East. The support that we are getting from Palo Alto is disastrous. The problem is that the support ticket is opened through the distributor channel. Before opening a ticket, we already do a lot of troubleshooting, and when we open a ticket, it goes to a distributor channel. They end up wasting our time again doing what we have already done. They execute the same things and waste time. The distributor channel's engineer tries to troubleshoot, and after spending hours, they forward the ticket to Palo Alto. It is a very time-consuming process. The distributor channels also do not operate 24/7, and they are very lazy in responding to the calls."
"The solution needs some management tool enhancements. It could also use more reporting tools."
"With new features and applications you get bugs."
"Most other VPN clients include mobile VPNs but Palo Alto does not."
"The cost of the device is very high."
"I think automation and machine learning can be improved to make bulk configurations simpler, easier, and faster"
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 23rd in Firewalls with 47 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 164 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiOS, Meraki MX and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.