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."The SD-WAN is the most valuable feature."
"You can create multiple Virtual Domains (VDOMs), which are treated as separate firewall instances."
"This solution made it very easy to manage our bandwidth."
"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."
"It's very fast and easy to configure."
"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."
"The solution can scale well."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"Cisco tech is always good and helpful. I would rate them as 10 out of 10."
"Cisco Secure Firewall improved our organization. We have it in every one of our French offices."
"With the pandemic, people began working from home. That was a pretty big move, having all our users working from a home. More capacity needed to be added to our remote VPN. ASA did this very well."
"The high-availability and remote VPN features are most valuable."
"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."
"For business purposes, it's a very detailed solution, which is it's greatest benefit, as you can get almost any piece of information you need from the solution. It allows for admins to be able to troubleshoot pretty easily."
"I found that setting up rules for HTTPS and SSH access to the management interface are straightforward, including setting the cypher type."
"The most valuable feature we have found to be the VPN because we use it often."
"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 view into the application."
"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."
"Support is very helpful and responsive."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
"The features that I find most valuable are the MIR (Mandiant Incident Response) for checks on our inbound security."
"The scalability has not been a problem. We have deployed the product in very high bandwidth networks. We have never had a problem with the FireEye product causing latency issues within our networks."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"The stability of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"There are a lot of bugs I have found in the solution and it is difficult to upgrade. These areas need improvement."
"The graphical user interface of Fortinet's FortiGate product does not function well with text-based interfaces."
"It would be nice if backups could more easily migrate between different models."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution. However, my issue is the performance only. When I use all the profiles, this affects the performance. From the beginning, I should have had a better sizing of the box."
"I would like to see a more intuitive dashboard."
"While this applies to all vendors, pricing can be always lower. In my opinion, Cisco is the most expensive. The pricing can be reduced."
"Report generation is an area that should be improved."
"We don't have any serious problems. The firewall models that we have are quite legacy, and they have slower performance. We are currently investigating the possibility of migrating to next-generation firewalls."
"We are replacing ASA with FTD which offers many new features not available using ASA."
"The Cisco Secure Firewall could benefit from enhancements in its API, documentation, and automation tools."
"Some individuals find the setup and configuration challenging."
"The solution needs to have better logging features."
"The performance should be improved."
"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."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"The world is currently shifting to AI, but FIreEye is not following suit."
"Cybersecurity posture has room for improvement."
"Its documentation can be improved. The main problem that I see with FireEye is the documentation. We are an official distributor and partner of FireEye, and we have access to complete documentation about how to configure or implement this technology, but for customers, very limited documentation is available openly. This is the area in which FireEye should evolve. All documents should be easily available for everyone."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
"I would love to see better reporting. Because you can't export some of the reports in proper formats, it is hard to extract the data from reports."
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.
