We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks K2-Series 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 technical support is great."
"The initial installation is very straightforward."
"The security features that they have are quite good. On top of that, their licensing model is quite nice where they don't charge you anything for the SD-WAN functionality for the firewall."
"LinkGreat firewall capabilities"
"One of the nice things about FortiGate is that it can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises. You can actually do both. That's the biggest reason why I stick with this solution as opposed to something like Cisco Meraki. Another nice thing is that I can log directly into a FortiGate or get to it through their FortiCloud access products. They're pretty reliable and consistent. One of the reasons why I started using the product was their single pane of management. I can deploy their line of firewalls in conjunction with their switching and access points, and I can manage the entire network from one interface. I don't have to log into one interface for the firewall, another one for the access points, and another one for the switches. These firewalls have access point controller functionality built right into the system, so I don't even have to purchase additional devices to manage them."
"The most important features with FortiGate are the web filter and application controls. We can control our internet usage and use the web filter for application purposes."
"The security fabric is excellent."
"The response is very quick and they can visually resolve our problems in a short period."
"The best features are stability and scalability."
"The stability of the product is good."
"Application inspection, network segmentation, and encrypted traffic detection or encrypted traffic analysis (ETA) are valuable for our customers."
"Collaboration with other Cisco products such as ISE and others is the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup was not complex."
"The VPN is our most widely used feature for Cisco Secure Firewall. Since we were forced into a hybrid working situation by COVID a few years back, VPN is the widely used feature because everybody is working remotely for our agency. So it came in very handy."
"The feature set is fine and is rarely a problem."
"One of the most valuable features is the AMP. It's very good and very reliable when it comes to malicious activities, websites, and viruses."
"One of the most valuable features is Palo Alto's firewall management. We find it easier to manage the firewall centrally."
"Palo Alto has a unique solution for DNS security, which is very good."
"The most valuable features are the virtualization of the firewall and the antivirus."
"The IPS system is the best in the field."
"I have found the threat profile feature valuable."
"Palo Alto's App-ID is what differentiates it from other competitors."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is the performance which is above their competitors. The throughput they have delivered is good. When we used other solutions they failed the deployment when we were using different rules. They have a theory perform performance light and performance degradation. However, Palo Alto Networks K2-Series never fails in that scenario."
"We've found the solution offers us good stability."
"Palo Alto has a feature called WildFire Analysis that is unavailable in FortiGate. WildFire is better than a sandbox because it can address zero-day threats and vulnerabilities. It can immediately identify zero-day threats from the cloud."
"While FortiGate is cheaper than most other solutions, we're seeing increased license renewal costs. Most of our clients are asking for more significant discounts because the price is going up."
"The graphical user interface of Fortinet's FortiGate product does not function well with text-based interfaces."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"Currently, without the additional reporting module, we only have access to basic reporting."
"It claims it does DLP, but the degree and level of controls are very basic."
"Its filtering is sometimes too precise or strict. We sometimes have to bypass and authorize some of the sites, but they get blocked. We know that they are trusted sites, but they are blocked, and we don't know why."
"Security is a continuous process. In every product, there is a requirement for improvement. Its pricing should also be improved according to Indian market requirements. They must also improve on the reporting part. Its reporting can be more precise. If we can get a real-time report in a specific format, it will be helpful for customers to know about the current status of their security."
"It's lacking one feature: VPN. Also, the 2100 Series lacks a DDoS feature. If they could add that to those platforms, that would be good."
"Cisco's inspection visibility could be better."
"It has poor performance."
"Cisco Firepower is not completely integrated with Active Directory. We are trying to use Active Directory to restrict users by using some security groups that are not integrated within the Cisco Firepower module. This is the main issue that we are facing."
"Web filtering needs improvement because sometimes the URL is miscategorized."
"They need a user-friendly interface that we could easily configure."
"Cisco Secure Firewall should be easier to handle. It uses ASDM, which is not easy to understand. It would be better if there was direct access via HTTPS."
"I have found that Cisco reporting capabilities are not as rich as other products, so the reporting could be improved."
"The reporting functionality in GlobalProtect needs to be improved."
"We had some issues with upgrading in the past. They could make the process easier."
"When it comes to renewing the solution, they tend to try to jack up the pricing."
"The tool needs to improve integration with more products from other vendors. I would like the product to add threat intelligence features as well."
"Palo Alto has many other products. It would be nice for these products to be centralized under one tool"
"The URL Filtering module needs to have more categories added to it."
"It would be nice if it could easily be integrated with Elasticsearch or Nagios."
"They could improve by providing more features in the solution."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is ranked 28th in Firewalls with 28 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is rated 8.4. 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 Palo Alto Networks K2-Series writes "Easy to implement and manage, and the documentation is good". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks K2-Series 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.
