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."We use a southern institution that's audited for IT security and the reporting that automatically comes off the unit makes it much easier to meet compliance standards and makes it easier as far as the amount of time that has to be spent to compile that information. If you get your reporting set up correctly when you initially set it up, you just select the one you want and hit print. The auditing trail on it is the best feature."
"The feature I like most is the SD-WAN. It allows you to manage more than one ISP at the same time. And there is a high-availability mode, so if one of your ISPs is down, you still have a backup."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"FortiGate improved our security. It's one of the best hardware firewalls."
"This is an easy solution to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution."
"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."
"With FortiClient, you can easily connect when you are home, check out what you want to do, and connect to your network when you are not at work. You can switch on servers and you can check what is wrong."
"Provides good integrations and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion Prevention System."
"Stability is perfect. I haven't had any problems."
"The most valuable feature that Cisco Firepower NGFW provides for us is the Intrusion policy."
"The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic."
"We have not had to deal with stability issues."
"The feature set is fine and is rarely a problem."
"The most valuable features of this solution are advanced malware protection, IPS, and IDS."
"The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
"The sandbox feature of FireEye Network Security is very good. The operating system itself has many features and it supports our design."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"The installation phase was easy."
"Support is very helpful and responsive."
"Very functional and good for detecting malicious traffic."
"The firewall engine is not so strong as of now, in my opinion... My second concern is that, while they have Zero-day vulnerability and anti-malware features, the threat engine needs to be strengthened, its efficiency can be increased."
"I would like to see better pricing in the next release, as well as a simplification of the installation."
"The UTM filtering needs 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."
"In terms of what could be improved, the SD-WAN is quite difficult, because if you install the new box, 15 is okay, but if you change from an old configuration, if there is already configuration and a policy when you change to SD-WAN, you must change the whole policy that you see in the interface."
"The improvement is related to logs. Instead of the CLI, we should be able to have more insights into the logs of the firewall in the GUI."
"They should offer special pricing to premium partners and customers."
"We would like to see a better training platform implemented."
"The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed."
"When we first got it, we were doing individual configuring. Now, there is a way to manage from one location."
"It is my understanding that they are in the process of discontinuing this device."
"Some of the features, like the stability, need to be improved."
"Its user interface is good, but it could be better. Currently, you have to know what to do before you can manage a device. If you don't know what to do, you can mess things up. There are some devices that are easier, such as FortiGate. The user interface of FortiGate is more intuitive. It is very easy to log in and configure things."
"For what we use it for, it ends up being the perfect product for us, but it would help if they could expand it into some of the other areas and other use cases working with speeding up and the reliability of the pushes from the policy manager."
"The integration between different tools could be improved. For example, with SecureX, I am yet to find out how to forward security events to different tools such as Microsoft Sentinel, which is what we use for log detection."
"ASDM can be improved."
"Cybersecurity posture has room for improvement."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
"I heard that FireEye recently was hacked, and a lot of things were revealed. We would like FireEye to be more secure as an organization. FireEye has to be more protective because it is one of the most critical devices that we are using in our environment. They have a concept called SSL decryption, but that is only the packet address. We would like FireEye to also do a lot of decryption inside the packet. Currently, FireEye only does encryption and decryption of the header, but we would like them to do encryption and decryption of the entire packet."
"Technical packaging could be improved."
"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)."
"Technical support could be improved."
"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."
"It would be very helpful if there were better integration with other solutions from other vendors, such as Fortinet and Palo Alto."
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.