We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and Cisco Sourcefire SNORT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are DNS service and shell self-service within a network."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability. The nice thing with the bigger vendors is that they're very good at scale."
"Cisco IOS Security has many good features, but compared to other solutions, it has a more user-friendly interface with steps to apply and manage rules. Another good part of the solution is that it's more straightforward."
"The solution is very user-friendly and easy to deal with."
"Completely integrates branch offices with perimeter security."
"The product is easy to use."
"What I have used the most and received the most benefit from is the IPsec technology."
"The hardware is pretty stable. It's also a very good product performance-wise. Initially, it wasn't mature like a firewall and there were other leaders, but now they have included almost all the features of next-generation security. Basically, it's a good product to work with."
"The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."
"Solid intrusion detection and prevention that scales easily in very large environments."
"It has a huge rate of protection. It's has a low level of positives and a huge rate of threat protection. It's easy to deploy and easy to implement. It has an incredible price rate compared to similar solutions."
"I like most of Cisco's features, like malware detection and URL filtering."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility that we have across the virtual environment."
"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is easy to configure and the reporting is great. It's also very user-friendly."
"The whole solution is very good, and stable."
"Cisco technical support is unbeatable. It offers a premium service every time."
"The configuration and reporting interfaces need a lot of improvement. It needs to be more accessible forsolide without a strong technical background. If you had a simplified dashboard, the lower-level techs could manage the solution and provide services. Cisco IOS Security requires someone who is highly trained to operate it."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"In the security portfolio from Cisco, the issue is marketing. Cisco is still seen primarily as an enterprise network player rather than being acknowledged as a security vendor."
"Cisco is a scalable product, but it is expensive compared to other vendors."
"There's a technology called SD-WAN that we would like to see. We are unable to handle multiple connections or to automatically load balance. I would like to have a feature that enables us to automatically prepare for load balancing."
"While Cisco IOS Security is stable and scalable, I would like to see it improved to be even better."
"We cannot directly upgrade the system. The tool's deployment is also very difficult in legacy environments. The tool needs to have bigger ports as well."
"The solution is not user friendly and it is hard to manage the GUI interface."
"The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other products in the market. It depends on the environment. If we are doing any migration, it might take months in a brown-field environment."
"With the next release, I would like to see some PBR, so that you can do the configuration with the features."
"To be frank, the product is not really stable, although they're working on that. Whenever I go to the technical community with an issue, they will usually say that it is not there yet, but the technical team are working on it. The issues are not insolvable. I think they should just keep working on the product to make sure that the product can become very stable. The technical support is great. I appreciate that. We have a lot of communities supporting Firepower now, so you can find help for whatever issue you have."
"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."
"While the alerts they offer are good, it could improve it in the sense that they should be more detailed to make the alerts more useful to us in general. Sometimes the solution will offer up false positives. Due to the fact that the alerts aren't detailed, we have to go dig around to see why is it being blocked. The solution would be infinitely better if there was just a bit more detail in the alert information and logging we receive."
"The cloud can be improved."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"The implementation could be a bit easier."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 11th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 47 reviews while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 13th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 18 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "An IPS solution for security and protection but lacks stability". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS and Netgate pfSense, whereas Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Darktrace. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. Cisco Sourcefire SNORT report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.
