We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and Qualys VMDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."What I like the most is the configuration and that it's simple, and straightforward to maintain."
"The pipe filter application is an outstanding feature."
"A strong point of FortiGate is that the graphical interface is complete and easy to use, especially if we think there is a list of operations that we are able to perform inside."
"The features that prevent internet connections, the filtering are the most valuable because we did not have any internet protection before."
"This solution has helped our organization by having strong functions and a reliable firewall."
"Fortinet FortiGate's ease of management is the most valuable feature."
"It works very well. It has a lot of different functionalities. Its cost is also fine for our customers."
"The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"Previously, anyone in the organization would see any data point in the wall. They could just go and connect their machine with that data point and could access the network. But now, even if someone came and tried that, they will not be given access."
"Technical support for this solution is very good."
"You can scale it when you need to."
"What I have used the most and received the most benefit from is the IPsec technology."
"The capabilities for scalability with this product are huge"
"We use Cisco IOS Security mostly for routers to route off the firewall. It's a next-generation device."
"In Pakistan, we only use Cisco because they have good local support infrastructure. Huawei and Fortinet don't offer direct support in Pakistan."
"Cisco IOS Security is very robust and works very well."
"The most valuable feature of Qualys Container Security is the detailed information in the reports and the remediation. This is done to make sure there are no vulnerabilities."
"I find Qualys VM very robust, and it's very useful for vulnerability management and patch management. The value that it brings to my environment is economies of scale. There is no limitation on adding any endpoints. You go by the rule, and it's added once another endpoint is added to our environment. It's automatically installed, and it's less work from our end. It frees up my license automatically if I don't need an endpoint or if my machine is decommissioned. I like the dashboard displays because I don't see any duplication. The most important part is vulnerability management and prioritization. Unlike Symantec, it shows the kind of vulnerability I would want to patch first. It provides a holistic view of the kind of vulnerabilities and the ones I should remediate first. I don't have to do a scan; it just brings up those critical kinds of vulnerabilities like zero-day vulnerabilities and tells me to prioritize them. You have to prioritize these vulnerabilities first and go on with the rest. The dashboard shows me the ones that have been fixed, so I don't have to complete an aging report. The user experience and the graphical interface are good. As it's user-friendly and understandable on an executive level, it brings real value. We also use this solution because it's robust and flexibile."
"We also like the flexibility in their licensing."
"Tech support is helpful."
"There are many features. Its reliability, ease of installation, ease of use, and the richness of the information provided are the most valuable features."
"The Vulnerability Management and Patch Management features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The features that are most valuable are the identification, scan features, and the identification of vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable features of Qualys VM are its ability to do proper vulnerability assessment. It has a lot of updates for all the vulnerability databases from all over the globe. It's an amazing solution when it comes to the versatility of the features it has. Additionally, the reports are very good. It generates very detailed reports about the vulnerabilities inside the environment"
"One issue that I have had is that sometimes I need to monitor the traffic, so I need to filter it according to the user and which user is using it the most. I experience a bottleneck most of the time, particularly at the peak time when the number of contracts and users are at maximum."
"The solution is very expensive."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"Scalability is one of the disadvantages. When it comes to scalability, you have to actually change the box. If you want to upgrade it, you need to actually change the existing box and probably you take the system off to other sites."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"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."
"It would be good if they had fewer updates."
"In the future, I would like to see improvements made to cloud-based management."
"It would be ideal if the solution had more capacity."
"Signatures and other critical definitions need to be updated more frequently."
"The solution’s setup process could be better."
"The solution is not user friendly and it is hard to manage the GUI interface."
"Most of their features are meant for Cisco. You cannot integrate them with any other vendor."
"The initial setup is complicated."
"We need to pay for the license and it is expensive."
"With respect to user-friendliness, it is a command-line interface and those with such experience will get along just fine, whereas others may struggle."
"I do not like that all of the data is stored on the cloud."
"The ability to manage user accounts and give rights to the operator to know about abnormalities of applications is something that needs improvement."
"It is more expensive vs. other products on the market."
"It's quite complex on the way it is set up, so it takes a fair bit of time in order to get your head around it in order to deploy it. Once you've deployed it, then you're never confident on the versions of the browsers and the SSL certificates, etc. You have to always go back into Qualys and check."
"Improve the user interface."
"Qualys could improve the inbuilt dashboards."
"I would like to have CSPM, a continuous scan-like cloud added to the solution."
"I would like to see this solution simplified to work more easily in a multi-cloud environment."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 47 reviews while Qualys VMDR is ranked 3rd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 77 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2. 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 Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS, Netgate pfSense and OPNsense, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management.
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.
