We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall vs Juniper SRX based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions are very comparable. Each of them have a good set of features, and the solution you choose will ultimately be dependent on your company’s specific preferences and requirements.
"The product is easy to use and is stable. The SV1 functionality is a benefit."
"The solution is very, very easy to use."
"There are lots of features and most of them are deployed for internet security. Users are protected if they accidentally go to some malicious sites."
"The pricing is great and very reasonable."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"The simplicity of the configuration and the stability of the product are most valuable. The VPN concentrator is very useful."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is load balancing. It can provide central management and VPNA. Additionally, it has enhanced our security environment."
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"The IP filter configuration for specific political and Static NAT has been most valuable."
"The remote VPN and IPsec VPN or site-to-site VPN features are valuable. The clustering feature is also valuable. We have two ISP links. Whenever there is a failover, users don't even get to know. The transition is very smooth, and the users don't notice any latency. So, remote VPN, site-to-site VPN, and failover are three very powerful features of Cisco ASA."
"The ASA 55-x range is a solid and reliable firewall. It secures the traffic for normal purposes."
"It protects our network."
"It's a flexible solution."
"It joins all branches and permits employees to work outside their offices, but everything is based on high securities standards (PCI compliance)."
"The greatest benefit for the organization is the confidence that we are secured."
"I like the user interface because the navigation is very easy, straightforward on your left side pane you have all the sites that you need to browse. Unlike any other firewalls, it's pretty straightforward."
"The solution has been good for fulfilling our basic needs."
"The reason that we picked Juniper SRX is for the scalability, the fit for purpose, the tools that are available, the ongoing support and the ability to monitor, but particularly for the virtual routers in our data centers so that we can quickly upscale them when needed, when we need more throughput."
"I like the routing and firewall features."
"If we need to define our user system from an anti-spam perspective, we can constantly update the antivirus."
"We think they have a good interface, the operating system is good, it's robust. It has plenty of great features, and the relation between the cost and benefits works for our business."
"We use it as a firewall at our head office and branches."
"The solution is stable, inexpensive, and works well for medium size companies."
"CLI: Junos CLI is very easy to use, and it is also very easy to find back items in the configuration and to change them."
"The support system could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiGate can improve the integration with Active Directory. Additionally, I would like to have a Cloud Controller, such as they do in the Cisco Meraki solution."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"They should improve high CPU and memory usage that occurs."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve to be on par with its competitors, such as Palo Alto and Sophos. They are the market leaders. Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve its capabilities. However, we are happy with Fortinet FortiGate."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"The non-error conserve mode has room for improvement."
"The price can be better."
"It's not unexpected, but it's a common scenario where customers request dual layers of security. For instance, when dealing with regulatory compliance, especially in financial sectors regulated by entities like the Central Bank, having two distinct units is often mandated. If a client predominantly uses a solution like Palo Alto, they may need to incorporate another vendor such as Cisco or Forti. Importantly, there's a significant disparity in interfaces and management platforms between these vendors, necessitating careful consideration when integrating them into the overall security architecture"
"If you need to reschedule a call with the support team when you face a new issue with the product, then it may get a bit of a problem to get a hold of someone from the support team of Cisco."
"We only have an issue with time sync with Cisco ASA and NTP. If the time is out of sync, it will be a disaster for the failover."
"Cisco makes horrible UIs, so the interface is something that should be improved."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the UTM part should be more integrated for one price, because if you buy ASA from Cisco, you need to buy another contract service from Cisco as a filter for the dictionary of attacks. In Fortinet, you buy a firewall and you have it all."
"There is huge scope for improvement in URL filtering. The database that they have is not accurate. Their content awareness and categorization for URL filtering are not that great. We faced many challenges with their categorization and content awareness. They should improve these categorization issues."
"On firewall features, Fortinet is better. Cisco needs to become more competitive and add more features or meet Fortinet's offering."
"It was very difficult to deal with and required a lot of support, and the UI is very poor."
"It could improve areas which need high performance."
"The user interface is something that Juniper needs to improve."
"When I was going to upgrade the OS, the solution didn't accept certain USB devices."
"Ongoing costs are something that we need to manage and make sure that we're getting value on."
"The setup process should be improved."
"While the GUI is pretty good on the Juniper side, there can still be tweaks made to it that will make it even better."
"IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 86 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Check Point NGFW, whereas Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Juniper SRX Series Firewall report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and 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.