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."The wireless control is helpful."
"We use a lot of function on the IPS and it works well for us."
"Fortinet FortiGate appears to be scalable."
"Fortinet FortiGate's reliability is valuable."
"I only deal with it from a security analyst's point of view. I don't really get into the features of the actual FortiGate. From the security point of view, it works, and it does its job."
"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."
"It is easy to use and performs very well."
"Good performance, stability, and virtual domain ability."
"Cisco IOS Security increases the overall security of our network, performs authentication, and provides level 15 access and privileges."
"The solution is very user-friendly and easy to deal with."
"The most valuable features of Cisco IOS Security are the plenty of functionality it provides, many people are IT certified the usage, and the user interface is good."
"Cisco IOS Security is very robust and works very well."
"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."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is its flexibility and it performs great."
"One of the main features is that the hardware is extremely reliable."
"It is less expensive than alternative firewalls."
"Intuitive and easy to use."
"This is one of the best products I have worked with so far. I like the power of Qualys, and it's a better solution because you can scan a compact file, a BIT file, or batch files. The product already knows what's happening inside, and you don't need to expand the package. Tenable will do the same thing, but you need to have a package issuance claim. With Qualys, we can immediately understand the file, even a compact file. If there's some kind of discovery or incident, you will know what happened in the environment."
"I like Qualys because it is a very complete product, more so than Tenable."
"It is quite easy to implement."
"Technical support is fantastic."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is that this solution is very lightweight."
"The Vulnerability Management and Patch Management features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"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 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."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"The biggest "gotcha" is that if the client purchases what they call the UTM shared bundle, which has unified threat management on both, it's not as easy to manage if you have more than one firewall."
"To some degree, it's almost a question as to why some of this stuff isn't simpler. For example, for an AP deployment, while it's integrated, the number of steps that you have to go through in order to get the AP up, seems like a lot."
"The process of configuring firewall rules appears excessively complex."
"The reports are very basic."
"One of the features that I would like to have is to do with endpoint production, it should be integrated. For example, the firewall gets notified of any kind of forensic event that needs to be done, such as if there is a ransomware attack and how it originated, all those records have to be available from the firewall, which is not."
"If they could increase the performance a little better because the device sometimes gets slow."
"The solution is not user friendly and it is hard to manage the GUI interface."
"An area for improvement in Cisco IOS Security is the performance because it's not as stable sometimes. There's also some latency in the solution, which could be improved. Cisco IOS Security integrates with other solutions, but you'll encounter many errors after integration, so this is another area for improvement. I'd like to see enhanced performance and a simplified setup in the next version of Cisco IOS Security."
"The initial setup is complicated."
"The solution’s setup process could be better."
"There could be a bit more functions on offer that could make it easier to use."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"It takes too much time to deploy a policy to FMC. It takes around eight minutes. You can't afford any downtime when you're changing policies."
"It is a struggle to be able to pull our report and to be able to do onboarding using automated tools."
"The reporting and the GUI need improvements."
"Improve the user interface."
"Qualys VM should improve its methodology."
"Qualys does have an on-prem solution, but it is very expensive."
"Its integration with ServiceNow and other similar products is complicated and can be improved. It should also have virtual batching. They should support more standards and compliance requirements and more customizations. For policy compliance, they can add the standards required by the countries in the Middle East. Each country generates its own standards and frameworks, and those frameworks should be there in all products, not only in Qualys. The market here is huge, especially in the cybersecurity field. Qatar has a framework for Qatar 2022, and each and every company in the public or private sector has to follow the Qatar 2022 framework."
"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."
"If anything, I would like to see the user interface modernized a bit more."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 47 reviews while Qualys VMDR is ranked 3rd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 76 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.
