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 VPN is the most valuable feature."
"I appreciate FortiGate's flexibility, which allows for centralized management through FortiManager."
"The dashboard I have found the most valuable in Fortinet FortiGate."
"It blocks the vulnerabilities that can negatively impact us."
"Layer-3 firewall and routing are the most valuable features."
"Fortigate is very scalable to serve our customers' needs. We have scaled already from fifty to more than a hundred instances of Fortinet FortiGate. Around 20 staff are required for deployment and maintenance, mostly engineers."
"It is user friendly, and has all the features you need."
"I am "headache free" that I don't have to categorize all the websites and that security has been pre categorized by the people, and that the services are getting updated. At least one part of my problem is over."
"Among the top features are integrated threat defence and the fact that each virtual appliance is separate so you get great granular control."
"There are no issues that we are aware of. It does its job silently in the background."
"Our company operates in Saudi Arabia, primarily working with government sectors. If any hardware malfunctions, the defective device is removed, and we receive a replacement from the reseller. We have not encountered any issues related to delays in receiving replacements for malfunctioning devices which has been beneficial."
"The VPN feature is the most valuable to us because it accomplishes the task well. We're able to do everything we need to do."
"The solution is excellent for enterprise-level networks."
"The solution is used for the protection of the mobile data network. It is protecting 3G/4G Internet customers and the Private APN."
"We get the Security Intelligence Feeds refreshed every hour from Talos, which from my understanding is that they're the largest intelligence Security Intelligence Group outside of the government."
"It is very stable compared to other firewall products."
"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."
"The server appliance is good."
"Improved our systems and our customers' by providing better malware protection, defense against zero-day threats, and improved network security."
"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 installation phase was easy."
"The solution can scale."
"The product is very easy to configure."
"It allows us to be more hands off in checking on emails and networking traffic. We can set up a bunch of different alerts and have it alert us."
"Performance and technical support are the main issues with this solution."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"It is quite new for us, and we need to go more in-depth into the monitoring tools. It provides different features that we need to do what we want. So far, it is okay for us. In terms of improvement, in the future, they can provide a faster implementation of features. Some of the features are first available in other solutions. Fortinet sometimes takes a little bit longer than other solutions, such as Check Point, to implement new features."
"The product does need better support in the cloud environment. It's not exactly cloud-native right now."
"Lacks sufficient security options."
"There are a lot of bugs I have found in the solution and it is difficult to upgrade. These areas need improvement."
"They have to just improve its performance when we enable all UTM features. When you enable all the features, the performance of FortiGate, as well as of Sophos and SonicWall, goes down."
"Difficult to add or define, and not that easy to configure and manage."
"The initial setup could be simplified, as it can be complex for new users."
"One feature lacking is superior anti-virus protection, which must be added."
"it is not very user-friendly for the administration."
"Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products."
"Report generation is an area that should be improved."
"We have more than one Cisco firewall and it is difficult for me to integrate both on the single UI."
"In terms of functionality, there isn't much to improve. There could be more bandwidth and better interface speed."
"The user interface for the Firepower management console is a little bit different from traditional Cisco management tools. If you look at products we already use, like Cisco Prime or other products that are cloud-based, they have a more modern user interface for managing the products. For Firepower, the user interface is not very user-friendly. It's a little bit confusing sometimes."
"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."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
"It would be great if we could create granular reports based on the protocols, types of attacks, regions of attack, etc. Also we would like to easily be able to add exceptions to rules in cases of false positives."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"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."
"Improvements could be achieved through greater integration capabilities with different firewall solutions. Integrating with the dashboard itself for different firewalls so users can also pull tags into their firewall dashboard."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 112 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 14th in ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) with 5 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 "Includes multiple tools that help manage and troubleshoot, but needs SD-WAN for load balancing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Great sandboxing, good reliability, and helpful support". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Juniper SRX Series Firewall, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, NetWitness Platform and Check Point SandBlast Network.
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.