We performed a comparison between Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] and Juniper SRX Series Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"One of the valuable features is a standardized OS."
"The next-generation firewall is great."
"The wireless control is helpful."
"Security solution with a straightforward and quick setup. It's a stable and scalable product."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"The interface is very good."
"Whenever I need something, Fortinet improves and updates the software for me."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"The most valuable feature for us was to implement negligent functionality, to direct functionality to viewer control and application control so we could disconnect, and at the same time, we installed checkpoints. We disconnected our proxy."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"It provides visibility and drives organizational security."
"Firewalls help us a lot in controlling traffic on our network and preventing unauthorized access."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"We can create a domain to separate and segregate some functions, some services."
"The most powerful feature in Juniper SRX is definitely NCLS."
"I like the routing and firewall features."
"The solution is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"One of Juniper SRX's most valuable features is the site-to-site VPN."
"It uses many applications, like antivirus blocking and web filtering."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper SRX is that it is plug-and-play. Additionally, it has a lot of capabilities in one device."
"Juniper SRX Series Firewall is a stable solution."
"Web security solutions can be improved."
"It would be ideal if they had some sort of GUI interface for troubleshooting and diagnostics."
"A lack of integration between our data centers."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"I use the FortiGate 60D model and realized the 300Mbps bandwidth limitation. Because it is a product that offers many services, I think it could have greater bandwidth capacity."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"I need user-behavior analytics, to find threat scenarios from inside the organization, insider attacks. That would be very helpful for us. In addition, I would like next-generation features for small and medium businesses. These businesses require UTM, all in one product. Fortinet must include it."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"What has been the issue of firewalls is they ask me for policies and content filtering application control and all these features that are now part of Harmony."
"The interface needs improvement."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"While the technical support is good, the Indian level technical support could use an upgrade."
"The solution could be improved if there was a better way to report. The reporting functionality is not really good. Even though it's not the major function. Maybe adding a way to make a custom report."
"As we don't have a representative of Check Point in Mozambique, this makes it very difficult when we have some issues to resolve."
"Specifically on the user experience, sometimes the set up of things, such as the VPN SSL, takes a lot of time to load and a lot of time to get up and running on every session."
"I think improvement can be done to the security part, particularly the UDM, and the product should have a user-friendly interface similar to FortiGate. It should have the Azure RBAC in the next release."
"IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated."
"Juniper SRX's UI is very bad."
"It did not improve our safety because the IDS does not detect some attacks, but our anti-virus software did."
"The capacity can be limiting. We have outgrown its capacity. You can only scale up to a certain extent, depending on the device purchased."
"The Juniper SRX product needs to improve in terms of innovation."
"It needs better interoperability with Cisco gear."
"The GUI needs improvement."
Earn 20 points
Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 19 reviews while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 19th in Firewalls with 86 reviews. Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] writes "Great firewalls, VPN, and Intrusion prevention capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Check Point NGFW.
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.