We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls.
"Fortigate's most valuable feature is that it doesn't need a push policy when writing rules."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"It can expand easily."
"It's a user-friendly firewall. Most of the tasks are very simple. It's simple to configure and troubleshoot this firewall."
"The payment function for applications is good."
"The features that we have found most valuable are the SSL VPN and the User Portal."
"The security on offer is very good."
"Fortinet FortiGate has many valuable features, such as IDS, and intrusion detection. It has security features that are in part with the technologies that are available in the market."
"Network segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"We definitely feel more secure. We have more control over things going in and out of our network."
"We are mostly using it for remote access, so the remote access feature is the most valuable, but all other features are also needed and required. It is also a very straightforward and reliable solution."
"Cisco ASA works very nicely from an administration perspective. The management of the device is very nice. The ASDM (Adaptive Security Device Manager) is the software that we use and it is very easy to configure using the GUI."
"The user interface is very easy to manage and find rules. You can do object searches, which are very easy. Also, the logging is very simple to use. So, it is a lot easier to troubleshoot and find items inside the firewall."
"Cisco ASA Firewall is a well known product. They're always updating it, and you know what they're doing and that it works."
"I am used to the ASA syntax, therefore it is quite easy to make up new rules. I have found that DNS doctoring rules are useful."
"The feature I find most valuable is the Cisco VPN Interconnection."
"The features that I find most valuable are the MIR (Mandiant Incident Response) for checks on our inbound security."
"The most valuable feature is MVX, which tests all of the files that have been received in an email."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"Over the thirteen years of using the product, we have not experienced a single compromise in our environment. During the COVID period, we faced numerous DDoS attacks, and the tool proved highly effective in mitigating these threats."
"The solution can scale."
"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money."
"A couple of things I've seen that need improvement, especially in terms of a hard coding. The driver-level active moment really is out-of-the-box and we have to have contact the customer support and sometimes it is difficult to resolve."
"Tunnel flapping was one of the major things I had seen wherein your internet link remains but your VPN tunnel is down. However, since I got a fix from the TAC team, I have not noticed it, but the customer complained a few times that they couldn't access the internet because of this problem."
"The setup is pretty complex and not easy to implement."
"The solution could have licensing fees reduced in the future."
"Web security solutions can be improved."
"Fortinet FortiGate can be integrated with different platforms. They have integrations in place, but I can't say they're 100%."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"The process of configuring firewall rules appears excessively complex."
"Cisco ASA Firewall could improve by adding more advanced features such as web filtering, which is available in the next-generation firewalls. However, the Cisco ASA Firewall I am using could be old and these features have been updated."
"The overall licensing structure could improve to make the solution better."
"It seems very clunky and slow. I would like to be able to tune it to be a more efficient product."
"I wouldn't give them a ten. Nobody is perfect. I'll give them a nine because they help me with any issues I've had."
"When we talk about data centers, we are talking about 100 gig capacity or 400 gig capacity. When it comes to active-active solution clustering and resilience and performance, Cisco should look into these a little bit more."
"There should be more integration with Microsoft Identity."
"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."
"It needs to provide the next-generation firewall features that other vendors provide, like data analytics, telemetry, and deep packet inspection."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
"Technical packaging could be improved."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
"They can maybe consider supporting some compliance standards. When we are configuring rules and policies, it can guide whether they are compliant with a particular compliance authority. In addition, if I have configured some rules that have not been used, it should give a report saying that these rules have not been used in the last three months or six months so that I disable or delete those rules."
"It would be a good idea if we could get an option to block based upon the content of an email, or the content of a file attachment."
"It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning."
"Management of the appliance could be greatly improved."
"The world is currently shifting to AI, but FIreEye is not following suit."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 35 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.6. 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 Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Blocks traffic and DDoS attacks ". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Vectra AI and Zabbix.
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.
