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."It is useful for protecting and segregating the internal networks from the internet. Most of our customers also use the FortiGate client to connect to their offices by using the VPN client, and of course, they usually activate the antivirus, deep inspection, and intrusion prevention services. They are also using it for web filtering and implementing various policies dealing with forwardings, NAT, etc."
"It is easy to manage, and it doesn't need much knowledge from the team. It is a stable device, and there are many features that are included out of the box."
"The technical support is great."
"Web filtering and two-factor authentication are great features."
"Offers good security and filtering."
"There are great templates, so you don't have to customize them if you don't want to. You do have the option to custom create some folders and some reports, however, with what is there, you don't really need to go through extra effort, as they already give you a lot of predefined views of reports and so forth."
"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."
"The most valuable features are that it is very simple to configure and to manage."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"The solution is very robust."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"Firewalls help us a lot in controlling traffic on our network and preventing unauthorized access."
"The filtering was very good."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"We can create a domain to separate and segregate some functions, some services."
"I like the Junos OS, which has been very good for me. It's very clever."
"It is a complete security bundle. The cloud-based Sky Advanced Threat Prevention feature is very valuable. I am 100% satisfied with the performance of the Juniper firewall. It has a very good throughput. It works very fine. We use our firewall as a site-to-site VPN or Software-Defined Wide Area Network (SD-WAN). In both cases, it has a very good and optimum performance. Their service support is very good in India. I get really good support from the Juniper team."
"If we need to define our user system from an anti-spam perspective, we can constantly update the antivirus."
"Security policies in combination with zones: It is very easy to organize the security polices in a logical structure."
"The technical support is quite good."
"The product provides good performance and has features comparable to other leading products in the market."
"The rollback option and Commit Confirmed are great features. They give us the security to change configurations without downtime."
"It protects the data behind our switches."
"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."
"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."
"The setup is pretty complex and not easy to implement."
"From a reporting perspective, there's room for improvement. They're providing FortiAnalyzer through which one can get some enhancements, but the visibility and reporting still need slight improvement."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"We were not able to build a full-mesh VPN; however, I am not sure if this was the fault of Fortinet FortiGate."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding enhancements to FortiMail, FortiSOAR, and FortiDeceptor."
"While the technical support is good, the Indian level technical support could use an upgrade."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"Technical support was very bad because the supplier who sold it to us, wasn't very supportive, and he wouldn't giving us direct links to the OEM."
"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."
"As we don't have a representative of Check Point in Mozambique, this makes it very difficult when we have some issues to resolve."
"The interface needs improvement."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"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."
"In some cases, customers encounter issues related to network interfaces, while others prioritize security concerns."
"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."
"It did not improve our safety because the IDS does not detect some attacks, but our anti-virus software did."
"The configuration is difficult and it should be easier."
"The setup process should be improved."
"To compare with Fortinet, Juniper needs to improve their security features."
"The interface could be more user-friendly."
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.