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."Its performance in fulfilling our requirements has been satisfactory."
"This version is stable. I don't have any issues with this solution, in our environment, it works well."
"Advanced routing (RIP, OSPF, BGP, PBR). It gives you a seamless and simple integration into a large network."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"The ability to set up remote systems is the most valuable feature."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"FortiGate is flexible and easy to use."
"Cisco Secure Firewall's security solutions, advanced malware protection, and DDoS communication are very good."
"The return on investment is not going to be restricted to just the box... Now, these genres have been expanded to cyber, to third-party integrations, having integrated logging, having integrated micro and macro segmentations. The scope has been widened, so the ROI, eventually, has multiplied."
"The high-availability features, the VPN and the IPSec, are our top three features."
"Cisco ASA NGFW significantly improves our bank. It protects any high-value products that we use from hackers, viruses, malware, and script-bots. It gives us metrics on network traffic as well as what kind of attacks we are getting from the outside."
"It is a secure product."
"It's easy to integrate ASA with other Cisco security products. When you understand the technology, it's not a big deal. It's very simple."
"The ASA has seen significant improvement due to the IPS."
"I like the firewall features, Snort, and the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS)."
"Application categorization is the most valuable feature for us. Application filtering is very interesting because other products don't give you full application filtering capabilities."
"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."
"Support is very helpful and responsive."
"Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening."
"The server appliance is good."
"The most valuable feature is MVX, which tests all of the files that have been received in an email."
"If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"Bandwidth usage in reporting could be improved for Fortinet FortiGate."
"I would like to see better pricing in the next release, as well as a simplification of the installation."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the protection, it did not prevent us from being attacked. Additionally, Fortinet FortiGate could provide more features for WAF devices. I should not have to purchase two solutions, it would be a benefit to combine these features into one solution."
"The non-error conserve mode has room for improvement."
"The graphical user interface of Fortinet's FortiGate product does not function well with text-based interfaces."
"It would be a benefit if Fortinet would release a one-stop solution that is better integrated with other products and an automated emergency response system."
"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."
"10Gb interfaces should be available on more models."
"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."
"Other firewalls, upgrading is a very easy task; from the graphical user interface, you just need to import the firmware versions into it and install it. In this firewall, you need to have a third-party solution in both. It's a process. It's a procedure, a hard procedure, actually, so there is no straightforward procedure for upgrading."
"The ease of use needs improvement. It is complex to operate the solution. The user interface is not friendly."
"It integrates with other security products from Cisco, but sometimes, there can be glitches or errors."
"The ASA has become a bit old and needs updating."
"The graphical interface should be improved to make the configuration easier, to do things with a single click."
"I would like it to have faster deployment times. A typical deployment could take two to three minutes. Sometimes, it depends on the situation. It is better than it was in the past, but it could always use improvement."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"Cybersecurity posture has room for improvement."
"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."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
"Management of the appliance could be greatly improved."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
"It is an expensive solution."
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 Netgate pfSense.
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.