We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Juniper vSRX 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."Its administrative panel is very intuitive and simple. It is simpler than the other solutions that we had. As an administrator, we are always looking for the easiest solution to manage network policies. We are able to filter everything on our network and also use the VPN feature, which is important these days when people are working remotely during COVID."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"The CLI is robust and powerful, enabling rapid, consistent changes via SSH."
"Web filtering and two-factor authentication are great features."
"The technical support in our region is excellent."
"This solution made it very easy to manage our bandwidth."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"The interface is very user-friendly and I like it very much."
"The ASA has seen significant improvement due to the IPS."
"Valuable features include DMZ segmentation, and IDS and IPS."
"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion Prevention System."
"The stability of the product is good."
"The most valuable feature is that it's secure."
"Firewall help with cybersecurity resilience. I really like this Cisco product. It's user-friendly. I don't like some other vendors. I've tried those in the past. Cisco is pretty easy. A caveman could do it."
"Clustering architecture which offers zero downtime upgrades, keeping uptime close to 99.999%."
"This solution is easy to use if you know how to set it up."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The initial setup was very straightforward. There was no problem. The initial deployment took about one hour."
"Juniper is more flexible with the commit check and the commit confirmed command. The design of the forwarding and contract plan in the operating system is very important for the performance when we have very big traffic."
"The dashboard, customization, API, and pricing are good."
"It's a very powerful solution and the firewalls offer high performance"
"This solution works well. Their switches and firewall are good."
"I'm told the solution is the fastest, and, so far, I do find that to be the case."
"The solution has good features."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"It should be more stable. There should be full integration within Fortinet products themselves as well as with other third-party products. Especially when you're not dealing with SIEM and the correlation of the security box, we want Fortinet to be able to share that information with as many other products as it can."
"There is one big configuration file with no separations for the unique VDOMs. Maybe they could separate individual VDOM configuration files with the root VDOM configuration file referencing the individual VDOM config files."
"I would like to have logs, monitoring, and reporting for a month without extra fees."
"The web-cache feature which was previously on the FortiGate device, but was deleted with the recent upgrade should be returned. It was a very valuable feature for us."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"They have to just improve its performance when we enable all UTM features. When you enable all the features, the performance of FortiGate, as well as of Sophos and SonicWall, goes down."
"FortiGate should have a better way of detecting and managing the system memory because otherwise if the memory is too low, a system restart is required."
"The Firepower FTD code is missing some old ASA firewalls codes. It's a small thing. But Firepower software isn't missing things that are essential, anymore."
"It is hard to control the bandwidth of end-users with a Cisco Firewall. That is the main issue I've faced. I used Mikrotik for many years for this very reason. Mikrotik has the option to set a bandwidth restriction for a single IP or complete segments. Cisco should add this option to their firewall."
"The relatively new Firepower Threat Defense image (mix of ASA and Sourcefire network security) fills a lot of gaps and features that were missing on ASA."
"Also, they have a Firepower source file that I can work on the ASA device and on Firepower devices. A problem here lies in the way that you manage these devices. Some devices do not support the FMC, and some devices have to be managed through ASDM, and others have to be managed through FMC."
"I have used Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Check Point previously and I prefer the process of everything working together."
"It can be improved when it comes to monitoring. Today, the logs from the firewalls could be improved a bit more without integrating with other devices."
"The security features in the URL category need more improvement."
"One of the problems that we have had is the solution requires Java to work. This has caused some problems with the application visibility and control. When the Java works, it is good, but Java wasn't a good choice. I don't like the Java implementation. It can be difficult to work with sometimes."
"I've talked to people that say Juniper now, as a device, can be a solution for a data center, but in the past, I have not seen this as being possible."
"The biggest downside of Juniper vSRX is its pricing, which may be too high for smaller organizations. While it's a decent solution, the cost may limit its accessibility to smaller customers."
"We worked with Cisco's support and Juniper's support and there are some differences, to be honest, Cisco is more available and is more competent at addressing our cases."
"It is pretty complex to manage and could be easier."
"The tool's basic license does not cover everything. It needs to improve visibility and availability."
"The solution can be improved by allowing automatic updates for the OS devices."
"The user interface could always be better. They could make it simpler and more intuitive."
"They really need to improve the GUI."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Juniper vSRX is ranked 27th in Firewalls with 33 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Juniper vSRX 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 vSRX writes "Fast with good usability and fairly scalable". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, OPNsense and Zscaler Cloud Firewall. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Juniper vSRX 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.